Philadelphia Evicts Boy Scouts
Tom Pauken has identified what he perceives as a case of political correctness in Philadelphia. City officials are evicting the Boy Scouts from their city-owned building because of the organization's "prohibiting membership by anyone who is openly homosexual." Jeff Jubelirer, a spokesman for the Boy Scouts, was quoted as saying:
"With an epidemic of gun violence taking the lives of children almost daily in this city, it’s ironic that this administration chose to destroy programming that services thousands of children in the city."Jubelier didn't specify whether he was talking about the administration of the city or the administration of the Boy Scouts, since both groups are choosing to destroy programming rather than compromise their principles.
You can either stand with bigotry, discrimination and Tom Pauken, or you can stand with justice, equal rights and political correctness. Congratulations to Philadelphia for making the right choice.
Is Religion Necessary for Freedom?
The journalists at DallasMorningViews were debating that topic today. Rod Dreher had this to say:
"Clearly being religious is not a sufficient condition to guarantee public morality. But is it a necessary one? I think so, at least in the long term. When religion is sincerely held, it raises a particular moral code to the level of metaphysical truth. We can, and do, argue over right and wrong all the time, but in a religious country, the idea that there is such a thing as "right" and "wrong," and that it's objectively true for everyone, is really important. If God doesn't exist, then everything is permitted. Which, in less starkly pious terms, is only to say that absent appeal to religion, there is no final determination of right and wrong, and life then becomes about doing whatever you want to, provided you can avoid prosecution and live with your guilt."Dreher apparently derives his morality from his belief in God. He imagines that if one grows out of a belief in God, one leaves behind morality as well. This is wrong. It's a fallacy believed by many religious people, even intelligent and educated people. Saying atheists believe life is only "about doing whatever you want" reveals a profound ignorance on Dreher's part.
In fact, atheists are capable of believing in "right" and "wrong", even in absolute right and wrong. For Dreher, these ideas emanate from a supreme being. Believers can't say where God came from. Atheists can't say where absolute right and wrong come from. They just are.
Atheists with a scientific bent can do a pretty good job of defining right and wrong as something innate. Principles hardwired through millions of years of evolution. Principles that lead to altruism, charity, and sacrifice for the good of self, family, community, humanity. Principles that humans are no more free to change or discard than their breathing and sleeping.
Contrast that to the religious view of right and wrong, which is the arbitrary whim of a supreme being. Why is something right? Because God says so. Why is something wrong? Because God says so. God may have good reasons, his believers may be able to defend God's choices, but, in the end, if God had said the opposite, we'd all have to become murderers and adulterers to enter heaven. Why? Because God said so.
Personally, I'm more inclined to trust the judgment of a moral atheist than a pious religious person. For you know the atheist is doing right because it's right. The religious person is doing it to please an authority figure, or worse, out of fear of offending that authority figure. (Or perhaps to win an election, but that's another story altogether.)
No comments:
Post a Comment