Being my first blog post on TA, I felt I should start with my basic principles for how I live my life. While I am not a militant atheist (I tend to consider myself agnostic leaning toward atheist) I don't hide my views when the topic of conversation leads to the spiritual. I have seen how people of religion wonder how someone who doesn't follow a religion can be good and moral, and how we can see a purpose in our life without a higher power guiding us. Here are my two simple rules for living a moral life and finding purpose in life without the aid of religion, followed by a brief explanation.

Morality - "We should be allowed to live our lives as we wish, and do what we want, as long as our actions do not deprive another of life, limb, or property" People should be allowed to live as they wish, especially within the confines of their own home. Whatever we may do out of sight of someone else should be of concern to no one. Granted, there are many gray areas with this statement, and public decency standards should apply as well, but we should all have the freedom to live as we wish. For instance, if someone wishes to perform sex acts with a willing and able partner (or partners) in their own home or hotel room, then the neighbors should not have issues with it. However, if people wish to live as nudists, it is perfectly acceptable at their home (or in their yards (providing they have adequate fencing) but they should dress to meet acceptable community standards when going to the movies or shopping. As long as we don't physically harm anyone by our actions, or take what is rightfully theirs, then they should have no quarrel with our life. Granted, some people may be offended by another's choice of lifestyle, but then the problem is theirs. Of the many basic human rights we have, the right to not be offended isn't one of them.

Purpose - "Everyone's purpose in life is to sustain or advance the human condition" I think this is fairly self explanatory. Look at the world around you. Look at the people. What are they doing? If a family is living in a remote area of the world, and all they are doing is farming to sustain their family, they are sustaining the human condition. Does your job sustain or advance the human condition? I work in an auto factory. I help provide people with a means of transportation. I am sustaining the human condition. Laborers sustain us, shopkeepers sustain us, scientists sustain and advance us, who knows what politicians do. I believe religion at best hinders our advancement, at worst drags us backwards. Belief in ancient myth and outdated ideas of morality serve no useful purpose in civilized society.

Those are my two simple rules. Granted, there are many gray areas within those two rules, but I believe that allows individuals to make their own moral decisions and set the standards of their own life. If I chose to blog again, I will address several of the issues I have made my own moral decisions toward.

Views: 63

Comment by Natasha Kenny on May 31, 2010 at 4:20pm
I hope you blog again.It sounds as if you have a lot to offer.
Comment by James on May 31, 2010 at 10:19pm
Welcome to the site Darrel. I hope to see you sharing more blogs and taking part in others discussions. Cheers!
Comment by Joe O'Brien on June 1, 2010 at 5:46pm
You say there is no right not to be offended. So why should nudists have to put clothes on when in public? Who are they harming?

And why should anyone have to "sustain or advance the human condition?" Sure there's a biological reason to continue and improve the species, but I don't see any moral one. it makes me think of the hypothetical scenario where there are only a few people left and it is assumed their duty is to repopulate the earth. Why do we have any duty to continue our species? Maybe I misread you and you're just talking about reducing the suffering of current humans.
Comment by Joe O'Brien on June 1, 2010 at 7:41pm
Don't the general rules of the community currently not allow gay marriage either? Technically gay people aren't "harmed" by not being able to get married, but that doesn't make it right. It shouldn't be an issue of if the nudists are harmed by having their rights restricted, but one of whether people are harmed by letting them exercise those rights. I don't see how they are.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service