Moral Reasoning, Fundamentalists, and the Catholic Church

[Thtwudbeme]

I have been interested in this for two reasons; first, I am studying religion in school...a returning student, with burning questions that I can't seem to find answers to--and secondly, because some of the posts I have read in this forum seem to be fueling the questions I have about why people think the things that they do concerning religion.

Lawrence Kohlberg proposed a theory of a scale of moral reasoning ( http://faculty.plts.edu/gpence/html/kohlberg.htm ) in which he described three basic levels which range from "Don't get in trouble" to abstract reasoning of formal operational thought.

Could it be possible to take that theory and apply it to religious thought, and thus make our understanding of each other a bit easier? For instance--the common answer to the homosexual marriage issue seems to be that the people who are against it are in favor of upholding both common societal thought, and the doctrines of their particular church. (One man, one woman type thought--sexual deviation being seen as "scary" I suppose is another) But, I have never seen a well thought out personal opinion on why someone might think that the churches, and societal norms are correct, and should stand as they are. When one really thinks of the issue, the natural conclusion in my opinion is that if gays were allowed to marry, and have full rights as a couple, it doesn't affect me directly, however, it makes me happy to see my gay friends happy-- and...more pertinent to this post...I don't understand why anyone would allow a church official to think for them.

Is homosexuality immoral? I don't believe that relations between same sexes; relationships that have been both historically documented for thousands of years, and have been observed in other species is wrong, disgusting, immoral or any other negative label that I can think of. Do I think the Bible (specifically Levitical Law, and Paul's letters to the Romans) was wrong? Not at the time, but, now--yes. I do think it's wrong for the current time period. And I will be glad to discuss how I came to that conclusion if anyone is interested.

Thoughts?

[JanMichael]

1. Shamelessly kicking

nt

[trotsky]

2. Morals always have been, and forever will be...

a product of the culture/society in which they appear.

Morals evolved very much like organisms - a group of humans that had a moral code conducive towards propagation of the species had a competitive advantage over groups that did not. Survival of the fittest, in a way. Taking care of your old and weak allowed their knowledge to contribute to the tribe. Maybe you learned to hunt better because your grandpa was still around to show you all the tricks he learned. Etc.

We internalize these morals of our culture, and some of us seek to externalize them by claiming they come from a god or other supernatural source.

At least that's how this atheist sees it.

[Thtwudbeme]

3. I agree with you as does Jared Diamond

However, the longing for a supernatural force has less to do with morals and more to do with fear of the unknown.

Interestingly, though on your point of "taking care of the elderly," that was not a tribal tradition until relatively late in the game of human development. (I just made an "A" in anthropology...God, I love this stuff--)

I would like to discuss that further, but it's going to have to wait until next week, as I am supposed to have my husband packed for a trip in 45 minutes...(bows down submissively to JanMichael....the Atheist husband)-

Thank you for responding to this thread---I am hoping to get some kind of a formed idea from it on what needs to change in the educational system to allow for the development of abstract thought in this wasteland of intellectuals that we call the US. Why? I don't know yet.

Stephanie

[Nothing Without Hope]

4. There is no question but that the demonization of gays is morally WRONG.

Do I think the Bible (specifically Levitical Law, and Paul's letters to the Romans) was wrong? Not at the time, but, now--yes. I do think it's wrong for the current time period. And I will be glad to discuss how I came to that conclusion if anyone is interested.

I agree with you and would like to hear your reasons for coming to this conclusion. I'm wondering whether we followed the same resoning path.