Subj : Re: "Hams to the Rescue After Katrina" MSNBC News Article
To   : alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf,rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.dx,rec.radio.amateur.equipment,rec.radio.amateur.policy
From : N2EY
Date : Fri Sep 23 2005 19:49:41

From Newsgroup: alt.ham-radio.vhf-uhf

Cecil Moore wrote:
> Matt Osborn wrote:
> > Not really.  I'm still waiting for an atheist
> > to explain how it is
> > that he can have a moral point of view and
> > not have a religious dogma.
>
> You really need to study Ayn Rand's take on Objectivist ethics.

Hello Cecil,

That's very good advice!

> The objective thing to do is to grant to everyone the rights
> that you require for yourself, no matter what you believe. It
> bears a close resemblence to the golden rule.

Sounds identical to the golden rule to me!

IIRC, a fellow named Hobbes worked out the golden rule by pure logic a
couple of hundred years ago.

While Objectivism has some obvious defects and shortcomings, it is well
worth studying because it develops a coherent system of ethics with a
minimum of reference to unprovable claims.

For example, Objectivism has as one of its basic concepts that each
person has certain basic rights as a human being, such as each person
owning their own life. All forms of involuntary servitude, except as
punishment for a crime, are completely immoral under Objectivist
ethics.

Another Objectivist concept is the initial innocence of each person.
The concept of inherited guilt, usually called 'original sin' by many
religions, is incompatible with Objectivist ethics. How can anyone be
held responsible for the actions of a long-dead-before-you-were-born
ancestor?

--

Of course a lot of this discussion circles around because of faulty
logic and too-loose definitions. For example, what, exactly, is an
atheist? What, exactly, is a religion?

Suppose someone believes in God - but also believes that one of God's
most basic commandments to human beings is that they *use* their
brains, logic and experiences to know His creation and their purpose in
it, and that they must continually question anyone who tells them they
must accept anything without proof.

What do you call such a person?

73 de Jim, N2EY

.