What is good versus what is bad.
The world, and each other, is all we have, all we humans have ever had, and all we are likely to have.
Ethics in general is concerned naturally with a choice between right behaviour and wrong behaviour. When taken in that sense most people will naturally choose right behaviour over wrong behaviour most of the time, given reasonable social pressures, that is a starving man may choose to steal food knowing it to be wrong, but the instinct to survive or protect his family out weighs his desire to right behaviour.
During Man’s long evolutionary journey, survival clearly developed first and to this day is still the strongest drive. However, as Man continued his journey, society emerged and this necessitated the need for some fixed mode of conduct. It was then that the already inherent notion of living in harmony with our immediate environment was tested and with society came rulers who had there own ideas about right and wrong, usually based on self-serving attitudes. This meant that natural right behaviour of the general population had to be amended to suite the needs of the rulers.
Who are the rulers?
The Monarch of the UK is so popular with her people, it would benefit the world, if she had the courage.
To command no religion to be taught to children, under the age of 14, throughout the British Commonwealth
While I cannot say that Humanists will never disagree on matters of ethics, after all, humanism means freethinking, a humanist will base his or her ethics on free and rational thinking uncluttered by false claims to rightness and duty to some supernatural power. A humanist will put humanity and not gods at the centre and ignore the self-serving rulers of the church.
What is a Moralist?
A person who on a daily basis follows and adheres to a natural system of morality. One could hardly describe Adolf Hitler, or Stalin, as a moral person. It becomes self-evident that a person who would, through their religious belief, cause physical or mental suffering, leading even to death, to another human being, could not be remotely described as a moral person.
Human history is full to overflowing of many political leaders of any kind, from most nations, who have committed every conceivable physical or mental abuse on even their family and friends, let alone their neighbours, who could not be described as moral people.
Are you a Moralist?
Consider your general life as you journey on your path to death, for we must all die. Do you offend another person? Is your attitude towards others considered as selfish behaviour? Are you inconsiderate? Do you not care if others have a very bad opinion of your attitude towards others?
If any of these general ideas are true, or could be considered so, then you should not describe yourself as a moral person. It would not be honest if you did so!
Who not to offend?
As we journey through life it can often be difficult to refrain from expressing one’s dislike of another person.But it is possible. One can maintain a distance from them, have a dignified respect for yourself and refrain from responding to the discord they are creating. It is simple to say ‘No’ to taking part of or making a contribution to something you disagree with. If Tony Blair as Prime Minister of Great Britain had asked me to take the British nation to war with Afganistan I would have said ‘No’ but when he lost office and journeyed around the world on some mission to spread the foolishness of Christian belief, and then asked me if I believed he was a moral person, I would have to say a definite ‘No’. He would not be remotely a moral person.
The Thinking Child's God
The best gift you could give to anyone you love and care for - especially the young, but for all thinking people of any age