Religion – Part VI of VI
A Few Concluding Remarks

I began this series with a few definitive statements about myself: “I am an atheist! I do not believe an omniscient being oversees our lives nor do I believe any such entity created the world.” Not the exact words, but pretty close. The key term within this declaration is “believe.” Just as my certainty is cemented into my mind, I also know that my own filtering system skews the data I use to make these judgements about life. It is the same for all of us, yet my observations about human behavior suggest that most people do not question their conclusions, despite the clear evidence that this incongruous mindset is ingrained in all human beings. Perhaps if we were all walking around with an understanding we may not be 100% certain about anything, the world of people, as we know it, would crumble into chaos.

With that said, what I assume, with as much of a definitive notion as I can muster, is that we are our own worst enemy. That the way we go about our daily routines, living as if we have the answers when it seems pretty clear we don’t have a clue, is just a way of hiding our heads in the sand. Every day I might look through a dozen or so Op-Ed pieces, each person writing as if they have the answers to every problem and then telling the rest of us that if we only bought into their perspective we would all find the truth.

There are also hundreds of essays that pop up discussing people’s belief in either religious tenets or non-belief in the supernatural, each one suggesting our perspectives (whatever they might be) are wrong. My least favorite topic is the debate on the origins of morality and ethics. I don’t even bother to read the majority of these pejorative posts because the titles are usually clear indications of what the writer is attempting to convey. Most of the time these pieces suggest “the other side” cannot possibly claim the moral high ground. Those who espouse religious belief tell us morality can only come from a higher authority such as an omniscient being of some sort. The secular response is that true morality must be formed on an individual basis from someone who has rejected decrees from what they believe to be a potentially corrupt religious system.

All of this is nonsense. Examples through the ages have made it abundantly clear there have been highly moral atheists as well as extraordinarily dysfunctional and destructive religious leaders. And vice versa. As examples, our current president is devoid of any moral compass and despite his lip service to the religious right, there is no god in his life other than himself. On the other side is a person like the Reverand Martin Luther King Jr. who was as moral and ethical a person as one could ever want to know and had a faith deeply rooted in Christianity.

Someone such as Pete Hegseth ostensibly prays every day, yet he lacks any compassion and is the antithesis of what most people would view as a moral human being. Then there is the gentle brilliance and kindness of someone like Carl Sagan who embodied a belief in science over fiction and lived a life of grace and humility. The bottom line is that whether someone embraces a religious life or whether they have turned their backs on any form of the supernatural, it doesn’t impact their moral and ethical compass.

But let’s delve into what morality and ethics mean since we cannot go any further without first finding at least some common ground with regard to the definitions. [For further reading, links to the Stanford University department of philosophy have been added – Morality / Ethics]. Generally these two words are related by a presumed united desire to move towards a society that allows for a reasonable and peaceful coexistence under principals where we, as a species, are able to interact, survive, procreate, and grow in a manner that is mutually beneficial. Of course this is highly subjective as are all human endeavors. But when we can parse out what the basic goals are of a moralistic and ethical culture, we can begin to find that elusive common ground.

I believe the majority of people would like to be able to trust the information they receive as dependable and rooted in fact. This, to me, is Ethical communication. Unfortunately most of us are also seeking input that corroborates preexisting notions of the world at large and until we are able to delineate what is the true nature of fact versus faith, we are all susceptible to being swayed by data that fits our prejudices. This is as true in religious dogma as it is in Secular Humanist philosophy. In attempting to circumvent our subjectivity, listening to others without judgement is the first step. Plus, and perhaps of even greater importance, is being honest not only with others, but with ourselves. This is the key to working towards living an ethical life.

As noted above, morality is tied to ethics and yet the basis for an individual’s moral compass has much greater malleability based on culture, upbringing, and personal perspective. Many of our legislative laws are geared towards creating codes of morality that ostensibly give societies more structure and less chaos. We see these moral codes as coming from a variety of sources including the Judeo/Christian tenets found in religious text and also from the practical and pragmatic scientific understanding of human behavior. A Buddhist monk, a Catholic Priest, a Rabbi, an Imam, and a Secular Humanist will all give you a rundown of what they each believe are the best moral rules by which to live one’s life. The reasons will vary, sometimes dramatically, even though there is going to be some commonality in the basic premises.

The connection we must try to make in this cacophonous world of morality is to allow others to live the life they choose without interfering or passing judgement on those who see the world from a different vantage point. As long as someone’s lifestyle and belief system does not include the curtailing of the rights, privileges, and abilities of a fellow human, we can live in relative peace. This is not an easy goal. The actions of any person can have a deleterious impact on someone else’s life, just by the simple act of unintentionally stepping on the toes of a neighbor. But that’s when we need to talk to each other, to listen, to communicate in clear language, and try our best to find a compromise and an understanding of how to mitigate the issues.

Ultimately, nonbelief and spirituality can live side by side in harmony. But that coexistence is dependent on our ability to allow for others to live the life they want. Live and Let Live is a sage offering that has been around for many, many years, so why not now? And if not now, when?

Return to Home Page & Archives

Click Here to Add a Comment & Join the Conversation