”The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians who acknowledge Jesus with their lips then walk out the door and deny him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply find unbelievable.”

I know Christians who are doing this right now. Sad really.  Take this (fictional) story as an example of truth in this statement.  You know people like this don’t you?

A man was being tailgated by a stressed out woman on a busy boulevard. Suddenly, the light turned yellow, just in front of him. He did the right thing, stopping at the crosswalk, even though he could have beaten the red light by accelerating through the intersection.

The tailgating woman was furious and honked her horn, screaming in frustration, as she missed her chance to get through the intersection, dropping her cell phone and makeup.

As she was still in mid-rant, she heard a tap on her window and looked up into the face of a very serious police officer. The officer ordered her to exit her car with her hands up.

He took her to the police station where she was searched, fingerprinted, photographed, and placed in a holding cell. After a couple of hours, a policeman approached the cell and opened the door. She was escorted back to the booking desk where the arresting officer was waiting with her personal effects.

He said, ‘I’m very sorry for this mistake. You see, I pulled up behind your car while you were blowing your horn, flipping off the guy in front of you, and cussing a blue streak at him.’ I noticed the ‘What Would Jesus Do’ bumper sticker, the ‘Choose Life’ license plate holder, the ‘Follow Me to Sunday-School’ bumper sticker, and the chrome-plated Christian fish emblem on the trunk; naturally…I assumed you had stolen the car.’

The first thing to realize is that there are a few different scenarios which the terrorists could be using on your particular flight.  (Also realize that it could happen on any flight, not just one originating from a non U.S. location.) Options include testing TSA and law enforcement personnel, testing passengers and crewmembers, observation, dry run/practice, and actual execution of an attack.  Of course it is hard to differentiate which scenario is playing out until after your flight lands, but it might assist you in recognizing the threat and knowing how serious your reaction should be if you know all of the options. In most of these instances, their job is to also scare you. Terrorists create terror. If you stop flying, they win.  So be pro-active. Maybe something you do will cause them to call off the attack.

As a passenger you must be observant and vigilant. Most often someone notices some unusual activity or behavior. It doesn’t have to be just a person either. Suspicious bags, luggage, packages, notes, pillows, and electronic devices have been found on planes.  One of the biggest advantages you have is the ability to profile. TSA refuses to do the obvious thanks to political correctness.  Everyone knows who is committing these attacks — Muslim, Middle-Eastern men between 18 and 40.  Maybe al Qaeda is trying to recruit others than don’t fit this profile but it sure fits the mold right now.

Some things to look for: groups or pairs of men, a passenger talking to themselves, speaking Arabic, watching crewmembers (this is different than looking), staring at the cockpit door, long stays or multiple trips to the lavatory, reading a book but not turning any pages, nervousness, being unusual by trying to fit in, taking pictures/videos, not making eye contact. When you are at the boarding area and on the plane if you notice a suspicious passenger, look for others.  How many?  If it is one or two then they could be planning on bombing the aircraft or just making observations of crew procedures.  6 or more?  Then this cell’s objective would be hijacking the plane by brute force.  Also remember that there are sleepers that try to blend in with the other passengers and could be very hard to notice.  A website reports a well-dressed man in custody that was also a passenger on Delta Flight 253. After an incident, your entire plane might be delayed for security and they will treat everyone as suspects.  Also expect the government and airline to try to cover up parts or all of an event.

A recent example of a possible test occurred on Nov 17 with an Airtran flight from Atlanta to Houston. Eleven Muslim men got on the plane and caused a big disturbance and ended with passengers assisting the flight attendants in the commotion. TSA was called, they took the men off, talked to them, and put them back on. The crewmembers walked off the plane refusing to fly it, and then passengers walked off as well. The terrorists tested the TSA and passengers but probably also threatened lawsuits to the government and Airtran. This could be setting up a later mission with hopes the TSA and airline would be afraid to take them off the plane. Just like the Delta flight, the final layer of security, the crewmembers and passengers, are the ones who might have prevented an attack, nothing the government did was successful.

The best time to do something is prior to boarding and before the aircraft pushes back from the gate while the door is still open. This is when you have some control in the situation and easier for the captain to get involved.  Before you board you can talk to a TSA employee or gate agent and explain your concerns. The gate agents are usually very busy and might give you the brush off.   Talk to other passengers.  While on the plane you will have to find a flight attendant, which could prove difficult because at times the boarding process can be quite chaotic.  If one flight attendant seems to ignore you then talk to the other one.  Maybe ask to see the captain.  Write a note.  If you are really scared, grab your bags, say you are sick, and get off the plane. Some crewmembers can be just as ignorant about the serious nature of the threat as our government officials.  One time after a flight years ago a flight attendant asked me what the captain did about the suspicious passenger. She had called the cockpit inflight to report the behavior to the captain (since retired) and he neglected to tell me anything and did nothing.

While seated look for able-bodied men, military personnel, or deadheading crew to assist you.  Maybe you notice a suspicious passenger but do not feel it warrants a visit with TSA/Flight Attendant or it happens inflight . Volunteer yourself or change seats on your own to sit next to or right behind any suspicious passengers.  A recent crew moved a soldier to sit next to a nervous Middle-Eastern passenger before pushback.  Once while I was deadheading in coach during a flight, the captain told the flight attendant to move me next to a suspicious passenger.

Once airborne there are limited options.  Talking to the flight attendants and moving seats is basically all you can do.  A divert takes time and would be a major emergency.  On the flight I diverted for security issues we had an F-16 on our tail, ready to shoot us down if we didn’t immediately land.

If an actual attack occurs, then all bets are off.  Take Action! DO NOT wait for crewmember instruction! This is a life or death situation.  The terrorists will be hoping for the element of surprise.  You will probably die anyways if the terrorists are successful so you might as well die giving them a fight.  If it is a hijacking, block the aisles and do not let them get to the cockpit.  For a bombing, jump on the passenger and separate him from the ignition source.  For a suspicious package, box, etc. there is a place on the plane to move it to, but do not move it until necessary and with guidance from the crew.

The airlines are doing their best just to stay in business with the recession, bad weather, tough competition, and low fares.  The employees are very frustrated with pay cuts, long hours, full planes, grumpy customers and poor morale. The commercial aviation system wasn’t designed to fight terrorists. And don’t necessarily blame the TSA and law enforcement agencies.  They have some really hard working personnel trying to protect us.  It is the policies implemented by people working in the U.S. government that is the problem, and amazing enough, it is the federal government that is required by law to defend us by the U.S. constitution.  So what do they do?  President Obama decides to take legal action against CIA employees for using special interrogation techniques to obtain information from terrorists to keep us safe.  It was an obvious emotional, liberal, political decision.  This will only make it much more difficult for the intelligence agencies to do their jobs and recruit/retain top talent, as well as lowering morale.

Another government employee, the DHS Secretary herself, said after the 12/25 attempted bombing, “the system worked” when it was obvious to the world that it did not.  The news media gave President Bush an amazing amount of grief for not connecting the dots with 9/11.  Regarding the underwear bomber on Flight 253; his father warned the government, was on a watch list, paid cash for his ticket, no passport, no luggage. A third grader could have connected these dots.  The Republicans had to undo the laws and policies enacted by the Clinton Administration that impeded communication between intelligence and law enforcement agencies while President Bush implemented new ones to protect us after September 11.   Now Democrats are acting like it is September 10 again.

Government by definition is a bureaucratic monopoly.  It is managed by politicians and career bureaucrats.  Slow, inefficient, unaccountable. Lots of finger pointing, blame games, commissions, hearings, conferences, meetings, and reports, but do you know anybody that got fired after 9/11, Fort Hood, or any other government blunder?  Deja vous with this security lapse?  It feels like we are on a team that wants to lose.  And I don’t like being on a team that likes losing and neither does millions of people across the United States.

Unfortunately, until the Obama administration, Congress, and our government officials get serious with national security and the war on terrorism, then what we will lose is more of our freedoms and the lives of more American citizens.

Something I often hear from Christians (or Muslims, and the like), but surprisingly from atheists as well goes something like this: If you want to really learn the truth if God exists or not, read the Bible!

I honestly have to agree.  I think everyone should read the Bible.  Christian, atheist, agnostic, etc.  READ THE BOOK.   You’ll be surprised by what you find in there.

But wait!  Before you do.  I want you to keep one thing in mind.  Keep this thought in the back of your head.  “God is the creator of the universe.  God is the creator of everything.   God is the most intelligent being who ever existed and and who ever will exist.”  Then promise me with that thought in your mind, when you finish this book, you will ask yourself this question: “Is it possible that the most intelligent being in the universe wrote, dictated, inspired, etc. these writings?”

When you’re done.  The answer to that question should be an easy one.  It will be yes or no.

Unfortunately, I know that some of you will claim “I’ve already read it.” or you won’t read it at all.  But I assure you, you can’t know until you do.  For those of you who won’t read it, I’ll give you some excerpts of this book to entice you to see what it actually says!

Remember.  The most intelligent, all loving God wrote this book.

“For I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever.” – Jeremiah 3:12
“Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger, which shall burn forever.” – Jeremiah 17:4

So which is it?  Does God not keep anger?  Or does he keep it forever?

How about this one?

“If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid.” – John 5:31
“Jesus answered: Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid.”  – John 8:14

Apparently the water is a little muddy here too.

Can we see God?  Apparently that’s a little muddy too.  A paradox perhaps?

“Jacob said, ‘I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.’” – Genesis 32:30
“No man hath seen God at any time.” – John 1:18

Remember, the most intelligent being on the planet wrote this stuff guys and girls – and – this “All Loving God” would have you feel how about mercy?

“Blessed are the merciful” – Matthew 5:7]
“Leave alive nothing that breathes. Show them no mercy.” – Deut. 7:2
“The Lord hardened their hearts… that they might receive no mercy.” – Joshua 11:20
“I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the Lord: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them. A curse on him who is lax in doing the Lord’s work! A curse on him who keeps his sword from bloodshed.” – Jer. 13:14; 48:10

Hmmm.  I’m confused.  What should I do now?  Oh wait!  Jesus came to change things.  He came to set us free from the laws.  The old testament doesn’t apply anymore. So Mathew is right and the old testament is “passed”.  Yet Jesus was very clear that he did not remove the laws right?

I’ve heard many pastors say in the past “God is not evil.  God can not do evil.  God is love and therefore the absence of evil.”  Sometimes I wonder how many pastors have actually read the Bible.

“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” – Isaiah 45:7
“Then God sent an evil spirit.” – Judges 9:23
“Behold, this evil is of the LORD.” – 2 Kings 6:33
“And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.” – Exodus 32:14
“evil came down from the LORD” – Micah 1:12

Ladies and Gentleman, there are a hundred other verses in the Bible just like these.  Google it, or just READ THE BOOK.

Lastly, I leave you with some commandments.  These are from the most intelligent being in the universe.  Remember, Jesus said he brought grace, and forgiveness if you don’t follow the laws – but you’re supposed to still try to follow the law to the best of your ability (some say you MUST follow the laws to get to heaven, even with grace).  So here are the commandments from your All Loving, Merciful God:

“Any person who curseth his mother or father, must be killed.” – Leviticus 20:9
“If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die.” – Leviticus 20:10
“If a man sleeps with his father’s wife… both him and his father’s wife is to be put to death.” – Leviticus 20:11
“If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death.” – Leviticus 20:14
“If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be “cut off from their people” “- Leviticus 20:18
“If a priest’s daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake.” – Leviticus 21:9
“People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God” – Leviticus 21:17-18
“If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them.” – Deuteronomy 13:6-10
“If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it’s inhabitants… even the animals.” – Deuteronomy 13:12-15
“Kill anyone with a different religion.” – 1. Deuteronomy 25:11-12
“If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.” – Deuteronomy 17:2-7

Sure is a good thing that today’s cafeteria Christians boldly proclaim their loving God, and just ignore all the rest.  No one would ever go to church if they were taught this on Sunday!  Or maybe, just maybe, this stuff was written by man, not inspired by God at all.  Just a thought?  Maybe?  You decide.

Answer: GOD

I counted the number of people that were killed by God in the Bible. I came up with 2,038,344. Now, of course that greatly underestimates God’s total kill score.  I only included those killings for which specific numbers are given.  There are many events in the Bible where no number of fatalities are given.  Noah’s flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, or the many plagues, famines, etc all are unknown variables, likely to push this number well over 30 million (see below).

Satan on the other is documented as killing only 10 people in the written text of the Bible.  Even those 10 are suspect, as God basically allows Satan to do the killings as part of a “bet” (Job’s family).  Don’t believe me?  Here’s the scripture:

There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job … And there were born unto him seven sons and three daughters.

And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? Then Satan answered the LORD … put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

And there was a day when his sons and his daughters were eating and drinking wine in their eldest brother’s house…And, behold, there came a great wind from the wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. – Job 1:1-19

So there you have it.  Confused?  So am I.

Now to take this one step further, let’s put some real world numbers to the rest of God’s killings.

Sure makes you question that “All Loving God” stuff huh?

I did some thinking about that the other day and made some interested realizations. Want to hear?

First of all, I don’t think anybody is really happy about dying at any age. I don’t think a person would be any happier about dying at the age of 1,000,000 than at the age of 60.

But lets assume this immortal transformation of your human body was possible. What would life be like? Well, I assume you’d probably live a few million or billion years on the earth. You’d probably be able to rise to power during that time and rule the place. It is possible even that humans might be able to colonize other worlds during that time, who knows.

The trouble is, the Sun is eventually going to go supernova and take this earth with it. If you’re still here then you will be ejected out into the galaxy in the cold vacuum of space for thousands, millions, or billons of years. You’re going to be cold, uncomfortable, and bored. Eventually your body would be attracted to a star by its gravitational pull. You’ll be pulled into the corona where you will essentially “burn in hell” for several billion years until that star goes supernova too. Then the whole process will repeat itself. After many trillions of years, the sky will start going dark as entropy takes over and all of the energy in the universe is exhausted. Stars will sart burning out and the universe will become cold and black, no heat or light anywhere.. and it will stay that way for the rest of eternity. What are you going to be doing during this time?

suddenly.. immortality in a human body doesn’t sound so attractive..

The air around your body is entering your lungs and absorbed by your bloodstream. Similarly, the meal you had this evening is slowly being digested and absorbed into you. Ten years from now, every particle of your body will be replaced by another particle. The matter that makes up “your body” is actually a stream of particles going in and coming back out through food, water, waste, air, bits of skin (that makes dust and is in turn eaten by dust mites) and so on. You are dependent on every animal and plant you have ever consumed to live another day, and every rain drop that has fallen to grow it or send water to your house. Even your skin breathes, rather than being a barrier it absorbs a bit more of the environment around you. You are constantly bombarded by radio waves, light, heat, radiation and other forms of energy. Your bodily makeup is also shaped by the genetics that were passed to you by your parents, your parents’, parents, and so on until you get to the first “real” humans and according to scientists, to archaic creatures that are long gone that once survived and throve. If you have children, you too will pass your code down though the ages to every descendant in the future. After you die, your body will be broken down and absorbed back into the earth and air. Every atom that once took part of your body will still exist in some form and will one day witness the death of the our sun.

Going back to your brain, every memory you have had shapes who you are now. Your parents, teachers, pastors, friends and enemies have left their imprints on your conscious and unconscious awareness. Every book you’ve read by authors living or not has also been stored away and affects your worldview, your choices, your desires and dislikes. Every television jingle and telephone call, every internet web page and magazine article, and every holy book or blasphemous piece of literature, just like these words on the screen before you, have been recorded and stored away for future reference. Each choice you make, emotion you feel and thought you think is the sum and more of all these bits of information stored in your brain. It works the other way too. Every act of charity or dishonesty, every word you’ve spoken or written, every meal taken with your family, beer had with friends, arguments lost or songs sung has rippled out from you and forever affected everyone and everything around you. This includes the air, the animals, strangers and lovers, your pets and plants, the street you drive on. The sea will eventually hold your waste and the sky will hold your tears. The waves from your life and the waves from theirs intermingle, collide and flow out though eternity.

According to scientists, before there were humans there were still planets and stars. The ground you stand on, the clothes you are wearing and the hair on your head all originated in the same matter that forms the earth below us. The earth in turn was formed out of the same energy that formed our sun and this solar system and before that the milky way galaxy all back to the big bang were everything was one tiny dot of infinite potential. Einstein showed us that time is relative. in a real way, the past still exists and the future is already here. With a small stretch we might imagination that the unity of the primal singularity that contained all the matter and universe still exists right now. Quantum physics suggest that past and future and conscious awareness are more intertwined so that in a real sense the things you observe around you are affected by your mere observing and stream backwards and forwards though time and space faster than the speed of light. I’m not making any of this up.

Some people believe in God. Throwing aside individual religious opinions and getting back to basics, what if that is true? What if God is everywhere and God is all knowing and God is love? If he is everywhere, God is in our midst right now, holding the atoms and quarks and quantum fluctuations in place and is in the space between the electrons and between you and the farthest galaxy. He is in every rock, mountain, cloud and photon beaming from the sun. He is in the brothel and the temple. He is in every cell and protein of your body and that of your neighbor and her yappy dog, as well as the trees and grasshoppers and the crab nebulae. If God is all knowing, that means every action and thought permeate the awareness of the divine in the same way your actions and words ripple into the minds of others around you. If He is perfect love, that means God is truly connected with you more intimately than you can imagine, and though he may not approve of everything you do you cannot separate yourself from Him anymore than that electron He is holding in its orbit around its nucleus. You’re not always consciously aware of this Love but then your not consciously aware of your own neurons firing.

Knowing all this, how all the matter and energy are connected to you as are all other living beings and dead things on this planet, that past and future and present and space are all one, and that you are dependent on everything and everything is dependent on you, and finally that God is everywhere and in everything and in every person.

Knowing all this, can you answer this simple question:

Who are you, really?

First let me back up by saying that I am a utilitarian.  What this means is that I do not believe morals exist because they are handed down by God or gods.  God might indeed exist, but thats not particularly relevant.  Instead, I believe moral rules, obligations and even political laws exist for a sole purpose: to increase human happiness and decrease suffering.    I distinguish this from pure hedonism or the philosophy of “if it feels good, do it.”  There are indeed many actions like taking drugs that feel good and might make you happy in the short term but in the long term cause more suffering and pain to self and others.  I also say God is irrelevant to the discussion because I feel if God exists, he too must be a utilitarian!  The reason is that I do not think a supremely intelligent being “who is love” would create moral rules or laws arbitrarily or for his own amusement.  God would not outlaw something “just because” or to test people’s faith.  He must have a reason.  With something like stealing or killing it is obvious that when people perform these actions that they cause misery and pain, so it would make sense that God would outlaw them.   But more on God and morality another time.  For now you will just have to agree or disagree with me that morality exists for a purpose (human happiness) and does not stand in its own right.   It is a means, not an end.

Secondly, I am not a moral relativist, at least not in the strictest sense of the word.   Moral relativism is the philosophy that morals are relative to either the culture or the individual.  What is right for one individual or society may not be right for another.  There is some truth to this.  C. S. Lewis in one of his books talks about modesty as being relative to the culture, such as the amount of skin that must be covered up and how much is allowed to be shown.  In one culture, a lot of skin must be covered up in another not as much.  The reason is that in the latter culture, people are used to seeing a lot of the human body and as such it does not incite feelings of lust or tempt people into unchasteness.  One could argue that this is in a sense “moral relativism” but Lewis would deny such a claim.   Or one could bring this down to the individual level.  It might be okay for you to drink, because you have a temperate personality and not prone to getting drunk, however it might be wrong for me to drink if I were a recovering alcoholic.  So there is some truth to that as well.

Moral relativism, despite elements of truth to it, has some obvious problems.  If morals are relative to the culture, and that culture believes its necessary to sacrifice the first born infant, is that morally acceptable?  In some cultures they still perform cliterectomies as part of a ritualistic coming of age ceremony.  Is it right to say that this is an acceptable practice within that culture and we should ignore it?  Or do we have an obligate as outsiders to step in and stop this from happening when possible?  If an individual believes no one should own personal property, does he have a right to steal my car?  There are countless examples where relative morality comes to conclusions  that we won’t feel comfortable with and would be difficult to create a society we’d want to live in.

So on the one hand, there are some areas where morality seems relative and others where it seems morality is relative and others where it seems it must be absolute.  What are we to make of this?  I believe the problem stems from blurring the lines between morals and values.  I define morals as the specific rules about what is right and wrong, such as “do not steal” or “do not commit adultery” to borrow from the ten commandments.  I define values as the things moral rules are defined to protect, those things that promote human happiness (remember, utilitarian here) and decrease human suffering and pain.  Values are such things as “truth”, “love”, “life”, “freedom”, etc.  Now my thesis here is that morals are generally relative to the time, place and situation, whereas values are absolute.   For example, nobody values killing for its own sake except the criminally insane.  Life is a human value, not death.  As such its an absolute.  However the moral rule might change depending on the situation.  We generally believe that it is okay to kill in self-defense..   So the rule, the moral, is relative to the situation.  Its okay to kill in self-defense, because doing so protects your own life and might also stop a murderer.  Its not okay to kill for fun.

What is interesting about this philosophy is that with the exception of the criminal psychopaths, we all share the same values.  You can see this in the pro-life versus the pro-choice debate.  Both groups ironically share the same values!  The pro-choice group believes that it is okay to terminate a pregnancy because the embryo prior to the first trimester does not feel pain and is not truly a human being yet, or perhaps they belive the embryo might feel some pain but this is very limited and better than the woman having to give birth to a child she can’t raise.  On the other hand, the pro-life groups feel that abortion is wrong because the embryo is developed enough to be considered a human being (perhaps at conception), does feel pain and should be protected.  Also many feel that abortion causes side-effects both physical and emotional that harm the woman.

These are admittedly simplified views of the two groups and there are other variations but they’ll suffice for my example.   I think it can be proven that both groups actually share the same values, they just disagree on the best moral rules to protect and promote those values.  Both groups believe in personal freedom and the preservation of life.  The pro-lifers would be just as against a government program forcing women to have babies and the pro-choicers would be just as against the government forcing women to have abortions the way China does currently.  The two groups disagree because the two values come into conflict in a way that is not obvious to resolve.  The pro-lifers believe that personal freedom must take a backseat to protect life and the pro-choicers believe the opposite or that human life isn’t in the picture yet to need to be preserved.

This has some interesting connotations.   First it means that moral rules, or at least some of them, are relative to the situation at hand.  This shouldn’t concern us.  This isn’t the same as saying morality is “whatever I feel like” or “whatever society says is good.”  We can judge one society or culture as being better than another based on the health, happiness and other values that we all share.  Of course, its difficult to judge your own culture and easy to misjudge someone else, but this should not dissuade us.  We should try to look objectively passed our own bias at other cultures, other points of view and ask, “does this work?”  Does this make people happy, keep them healthy, prevent disease, death and misery?

This also means moral rules can change depending on the time in history. One thousand years ago,  protection of the environment was not a big concern.  If the environment is as big of an issue as some scientists say it is, than we have a moral obligation to protect it, to change our personal habits as well as our political ones to protect our air, food, energy and climate.  This is a new moral concern, relative to our situation and point in history, but the values are the same – human health and happiness.  You may disagree that the environment is a big concern, but even the most ardent right wing extremist will hesitate to shout “Pollution is good!”  This is because we share the same values and just disagree on the rules.  Similarly, other moral concerns may fall by the wayside.  If for example, there was such an abundance of technology and production of goods that everything could easily free (Star Trek fans will recognize this theme) the moral need to protect wealth, business and property may no longer be a concern.  I’m not saying this will ever happen, but we could imagine it.

I think most people, even particularly religious people, have a sense of this utilitarian concept of morals versus values, even if they don’t express it.  Religious people will not very often say “its right because god says so, and thats that” except for the most extreme among them.  I had a conversation with a conservative Christian about whether premarital sex was morally acceptable.  He told me “if pre-marital and extra-marital sex were outlawed, sexually transmitted disease would be reduced dramatically or wiped out entirely.”   He did not attempt to persuade me on purely religious grounds but he was basically saying that we as human beings would be better off if we followed this moral rule.  Although I disagreed with him, its a point I can respect.  At that moment, we were sharing the same values, even if we differed slightly on the moral rules.

We often disagree on moral principles because it isn’t always obvious what the correct moral action happens to be.  I already mentioned the abortion and environmental debates as a examples of this as are other disagreements between liberals and conservatives.  Often,  two opposing sides will accuse the other as being amoral.  While I think there are definitely plenty of amoral political figures, I think the average person has a pretty decent moral compass, regardless of which camp they fall in.  I have met very moral liberals, conservatives, moderates, theists, atheists, agnostics, humanists and fundamentalists.  I have also met crooks of all flavors.   Most would agree on things like respect for others, hard work, pursuit of love and truth, protection of children, etc. are all values we should promote.  They just don’t always agree on exactly how to do that.    There are countless gray moral areas even in just day to day life.   I think the solution here is to stand outside our own personal biases and view morality as another scientific inquiry with the purpose of increasing happiness and protecting life.  Moral knowledge will need to be flexible and increase or change, rather than just basing it solely on religious grounds, or ignoring the questions entirely.

“Two Words You Never Want to Hear” is a poem by Paul Tripp from the book “A Shelter in the Time of Storm.” Performed as SPOKEN WORD by Amber Mahon.