Thursday, November 6, 2008

thought of the day.134

We needn’t ask what is moral or immoral but simply what fosters happiness, what causes suffering.

16 comments:

Janet Greene said...

I agree! The alleviation of suffering is the greatest achievement we can have. I also find it a helpful roadmap when faced with ethical dilemmas; which one minimizes human suffering?

I think this is appropriate re: the abortion debate. There is no comparison between the potential suffering of a fully conscious adult woman vs a barely formed fetus. A fetus is not yet conscious (of course, this depends on the age of the fetus, and at some point this issue gets pretty mucky) but essentially a new fetus is an unconcsious lump of cells; clearly a separate entity from the mother, and also clearly worthy of consideration in the equation. But a conscious person with the ability to suffer must always take precedence, in my view.

john evans said...

Wouldn’t it be great if we kept a chart on suffering like we do on a nation’s debt or gnp? What if our goal as humans was to reduce that suffering very year? And we charted it so we could actually see our progress? And each child was taught simple, fundamental and practical ways to reduce suffering each day? That would seem to be a good step toward realizing heaven on earth.

As to abortion, I agree with your points. Bottom line is that restricting a women’s right to make decisions about her own body is more immoral than any choice she makes regarding it. (With the exception of late term abortions that inflict real suffering on a nearly fully developed child.)

Unknown said...

I don't understand how you can stick up for animal rights and alleviating animal suffering, and yet not defend fetuses who cannot defend themselves. If the female does not want to suffer, perhaps she should reconsider before having sex. If she's going to make that decision, there are consequences that go with it.

Because a child isn't fully developed, does that make it right to kill them in order to alleviate someone else's suffering? If someone was born with a birth defect so they were missing an arm or a leg, they aren't fully developed. Children with handicaps are usually not fully developed, at least not "normally" developed. But would you advocate killing them if, for example, having a handicapped child caused some discomfort financially and even emotionally to their parents? To their family?

Obviously there are burdens and stress that come with handicapped children, but we don't kill them to alleviate the parents' suffering. And if we did, we would be considered murderers. But these children aren't quote-unquote "fully developed" either. So what is the difference?

john evans said...

Kelsie,
I am very impressed. Not many people your age bother to think through such tough ethical issues. You make very good points and I certainly see your arguments as being very valid.

But I wonder how you would feel if a young girl was raped and became pregnant? Or was only 11 or 12 years old? Or if it was made illegal, how would you feel when many thousands of women were compelled to have “back-alley” abortions with coat hangers and died from hemmoraging or infection?

My feeling is abortion should ideally be legal, safe and very rare.

Unknown said...

But, unfortunately, in our society "legal" and "rare" won't go hand in hand. If abortion is legal, then a lot of people are going to abort. 126,000 abortions per day, in fact.

Believe me, as a girl, I know how very hard it would be if you were raped and became pregnant. Even thinking about it...ugh. But the fact is that the majority of abortions really aren't because of rape, they're because of people who made the choice to have sex before marriage or whatever without giving thought to the consequences. And then she ended up pregnant, and for the sake of convenience she killed the baby. That seems wrong to me. I think something is wrong with our world and our culture for sure when killing innocents for the sake of convenience is widely accepted. :(

john evans said...

I am glad you feel it is wrong to abort a child. I do too. It is very sad that it is often done as a matter of convenience. I just happen to think it is an even greater injustice to not let a woman have a say in the matter. It is a tough, tough thing for sure.

You mention the killing of “innocents.” But you have also acknowledged that as a Christian you believe we are all sinners destined for hell without the intervention of a saviour. It seems from that perspective, the unborn are not at all “innocent”. In the eyes of your God these unborn are worthy of eternal torture unless they do/say the right things (believe in Jesus).

How do you feel about the death penalty-for or against it?

Unknown said...

Well, okay, you're right. :-) You got me there. I guess by innocents I was just meaning the fact that they never got a chance to choose for themselves, you know? They never got to decide if they wanted to be a Christian or an atheist or whatever. They never got a say in whether they wanted forgiveness of sins the Christian way, or by some other religion, or whatever else there is out there.

As for the death penalty, I'd say I'm for it. I mean, I guess I'd rather say take it case-by-case, 'cause if the evidence is really shallow and not very definitive, I don't want to kill the wrong person. But if there's evidence against them, sure.

Actually, that's why I find Jesus' sacrifice so amazing...cause really, I'm a murderer, thief, liar, etc etc (going off of "if you break one of the laws, you have broken the whole law".)...I deserve to spend forever in hell, and I'm only 14! But then he came and took all of that on himself, he took the place for me, he took what I deserved. That's really amazing in my mind.

john evans said...

Hope you had a wonderful Easter and got some chocolate bunnies!

I personally think it is tragic to consider a child a “sinner” worthy of torture. There is nothing more sick and twisted than that. I want nothing to do with such an immoral belief system.

We are not “fallen” creatures as we were never perfect. In fact it is quite the opposite. We are becoming more human, or humane, as evidenced by the fact we no longer allow child abuse, animal cruelty, discrimination based on race, slavery, etc, We even let women own property and vote-imagine that!

It is evident by your favoring the death penalty that it’s not “life” you care about but something else when you argue against abortion.

And as far as Jesus dying on the cross be remarkable. Way overblown in my opinion. I would die on a cross to save my child in a heartbeat. He would have been a scoundrel not to in that situation. And of course he tried to get out of it. He did not die for you because he wanted to. He died because he was being obedient to someone else--God.

Unknown said...

Ah, you might die on the cross to save your child. But we aren't only God's children. Really, there's kind of 2 sides of us, because until we accept his call to salvation then we really aren't his children. As C.S. Lewis put it, would you die to save thousands of dogs? Or rats? Something low, lower than yourself, something dirty and unclean which has shown contempt for you?

And when I say I am pro-death penalty and against abortion, those aren't a contradiction. If someone does something deserving of death, like murder, then they DESERVE it. The babies did not do anything that they should be murdered.

Which leads me to my other point: Aborted babies, and any other babies who die (miscarriages, death as an infant, even death as a toddler) do not go to Hell for eternal torture. It is like when King David's young son died and he said he would meet with the little boy again in Heaven. A child, a baby, a toddler has not yet reached an age where they can be accountable for their own actions and even realize they are sinning. So no, we don't preach that infants are fallen sinners worthy of torture. You misunderstood.

Unknown said...

And I didn't get any chocolate bunnies...I'm too old to Easter-egg hunt, apparently. :( But I did get some marshmallow peeps. :-) So I'm good. ;-)

john evans said...

If billions of dogs and rats were going to be tortured for eternity unless I died on a cross I would certainly do so. I do not understand how any person could be happy in so called heaven knowing even dogs and rats were suffering tortures. It breaks my heart that christianity has so twisted your thinking that you/C.S. Lewis would refer to unbelievers as dogs and rats. This is dehumanizing language that makes atrocities like hell more palatable. Oh, we think, they are not quite human-so dirty and unclean they are! Such scoundrels! Do you really think of your unbelieving friends in such a way? Do you really think they are “dirty and unclean”? Do you think I deserve to suffer unbelievable pain for ever?

My point in asking if you favored the death penalty was to make note of the fact that you have little regard for “life”. Life itself is not something you value highly.

Well, the doctrine of Original Sin says all are born sinners and being sinners they are destined for hell. The church preached that babies and children were in fact tortured in hell. Then “Limbo” was invented to soften the horror somewhat. Now the whole hell idea is increasingly embarrasing for the church and they often soften it more by saying it is not fire one is thrown into but an eternal separation from God. I laugh at this idea and suggest that would be heaven for me as there is no more despicable character than the god of the bible.

By the way, what is that magic age where a child is old enough to make such an informed decision about his eternal fate? I seem to have missed that in the bible.

glad you got some peeps!

Unknown said...

I don't know the age. It's never explicitly mentioned in the Bible. It varies from child to child, there is not a defined moment where one has to make a decision for Christ or be in danger of Hell at every moment. For example, if a person is mentally handicapped and cannot really comprehend any of his surroundings and has a very low mental capacity, then they probably would not be held accountable. God knows that.

Also, you are lumping Protestants in with Catholics. We (protestants) do not preach Limbo or Purgatory or any of that stuff.

I do not think of my friends as rats or dogs, I think of them as human beings. And God does not think of them as rats or dogs. It was simply a metaphor, trying to explain to you how we are really not deserving of Jesus' sacrifice. After all, if he does exist and all the Christian stuff is true, then he went ahead and died for your sins - you, who is sitting here trying to convince me that that very thing didn't happen, that that very person didn't exist!

And, okay, I'm not trying to argue from emotion or anything here, but I really, really, really don't want you to go to Hell. Or anybody. That's what motivates me to go and argue with people like you or like Jay (a previous contact) even though I really seem to get no ground or convince you of anything. Because the thought of a single person going to Hell is enough to make me cry. Hell wasn't created for you or for any other person. It was made for Satan and his angels. It's the humans who screwed it up. And that's why I'm here talking to you right now...because I figure that if you are gonna reject God, I'm going to do as much as I possibly can to get you to see my side of things.

john evans said...

You are a sweet heart! But don’t get upset about hell. Smile! There is no hell! :)

Unknown said...

There are many souls who would tell you differently.

john evans said...

have you seen them? what does a soul look like? what is it made of?

Unknown said...

A soul doesn't "look like" anything we would know, because a soul is not physical, it is spiritual. It's in a totally different realm than the one we know, with matter and atoms and all that, that's all we know. But the spiritual realm is a whole different story.

I don't know what a soul looks like, but souls in Heaven are spoken of as "glorified" and they're perfect, no imperfections, no pain.

But I really can only guess. That's what I do in stories like the stories that are on my writing blog.