The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement?

[wordy]

The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement?

Oops some grammar error there. My poor English fail to find good way to phrase that idea.

I don't really mean it as a rule or demand or order or "should" or logical requirement either.

More like an invitation or goal to look up to maybe? Not sure how to set it up.

But there are something about idea to create The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement? that I like.

If I didn't mistrust Buddhism so much it could be seen as a Western version of Buddhism who does use such words as their buzz words.

A cool thing is that Dawkins like Kindness too. He named it Super Niceness in a typical mocking way but he does seems to mean it seriously.

Not sure if he always live up to it thought. Same with me, I mean I really do support The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement? but fail to live up to it.

But as something to hope for, to work on volunteerly?

[Brianna]

Love is a powerful thing.

[Lisa0315]

Jesus would approve. :)

[Ronin]

Let's take a better look!

John 2:15

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Jude5

I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

2 Peter 2

2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

2 John

1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Hebrews 10

10:30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.

10:31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Domestic abuser: I love you with all my heart unconditionally and you have every right to chose to love me in return or leave me.

If you do not love me and you choose to leave me, however, I will hunt you down and utterly destroy you.

wordy,

My next post will be some of my thoughts (you may recall from our previous conversations at IIDB) in support of the our basic human empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement!

[Ronin]

wordy,

These are just a few itemized standards of what I have come to find are practical human examples of care, compassion and reciprocity synonymous with morally beneficial philosophical system:

1. I believe that killing firstborn babies is wrong.

2. I believe that punishing the children and their children's children, etc. of even the most heinous of criminals is wrong.

3. I believe that disobeying a lawful order is a minor misdemeanor.

4. I believe that you should forgive people unconditionally.

5. I believe that you should not take virgins as slaves.

6. I believe that consensual sex acts should not be punishable by death.

7. I believe that using profanity or otherwise blaspheming should not be punishable by death.

8. I believe that sending savage wild animals to eat children is wrong.

9. I believe that sending plagues, floods, pestilence and/or chemicals to wipe out whole communities of humans is wrong.

10. I believe that just looking at a women lustfully isn't adultery nor is it any crime at all.

11. I believe that real, sincere love doesn't require fear of any kind.

12. I believe that people can offend me, however, if they cause no real physical harm to me or others they should not be killed.

13. I believe that burning people in fire is wrong.

14. I believe that tormenting people forever by whatever means is wrong.

15. I believe in speaking plainly and not in parables that confuse people.

16. I believe that killing disobedient children is wrong.

17. I believe that whipping people is wrong.

18. I believe that owning humans as slaves is wrong.

19. I believe drowning people is wrong.

20. I believe that the death penalty is wrong.

21. I believe that people can ignore me if they want to.

22. I believe cannibalism is wrong.

23. I believe that killing an innocent man for the crimes of another is injustice.

24. I believe forgiveness is not conditional upon a human sacrifice.

25. I believe that being the richest man in the universe and beyond is not a sacrifice at all.

26. I believe that people can be equal partners regardless of gender.

27. I believe that knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis.

28. I believe that humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change.

29. I believe that ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience.

30. I believe that life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals.

31. I believe that humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships.

32. I believe that working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness.

33. I believe that I should always reflect and live by my own listed moral standards even when no one is looking.

34. I believe that this list is not an exhaustive itemization of my own personal beliefs as a humanist.

[Ronin]

The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement?

Oops some grammar error there. My poor English fail to find good way to phrase that idea.

I don't really mean it as a rule or demand or order or "should" or logical requirement either.

More like an invitation or goal to look up to maybe? Not sure how to set it up.

But there are something about idea to create The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement? that I like.

If I didn't mistrust Buddhism so much it could be seen as a Western version of Buddhism who does use such words as their buzz words.

A cool thing is that Dawkins like Kindness too. He named it Super Niceness in a typical mocking way but he does seems to mean it seriously.

Not sure if he always live up to it thought. Same with me, I mean I really do support The empathy, kindness, compassion and love movement? but fail to live up to it.

But as something to hope for, to work on volunteerly?

wordy,

This is how I've been able to formulate a pro-active organization based on reciprocity, empathy and community activism (sorry, this may be a repeat for you).

Please feel free review it for clarity and refine it to your liking.

:)

Humanism is a democratic and ethical philosophy which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. We believe that virtues like morality, kindness, justice and generosity are derived from natural human values and reason which have been tested by the commonality of our practical experience and critical analysis of the natural world we live in.

We take the positive position that Humanism by definition is naturalistic, scientific, and secular.

Furthermore, we recognize that Humanism is a broad field of thought and action bordered on one side by the transcendental and oppressive views of traditional fundamentalist religions and on the other by an equally oppressive anti-theism both of which reflect absolute claims with a totalitarian emphasis.

Humanism includes those who are agnostic about claims of ultimate realities, supernaturalism and absolute truths and who adhere to an enlivened ethic that informs our lives and guides our relationships with all living things. It also includes those who have examined religious claims and found no evidence to support a belief in them.

Humanism certainly recognizes that life is more than mere cognitive responses to stimuli and appreciates the full range of human emotion, from the varied reactions to life's tragedies to the wonder and awe at our natural self and surroundings.

While we accept that science has led us to comprehend emotions as natural phenomena this understanding certainly doesn't lessen the actual wondrous experience of them.

A basic premise to Humanism is that conclusions about many things in this world have to change as knowledge grows. It is necessary to remain open-minded, to avoid jumping to conclusions and often to simply suspend judgment.

Because we commonly use the scientific method we recognize that even our most central beliefs may have to change in the light of further evidence. Even more importantly, when we form a conclusion it is important that we do not force it upon other people.

As Humanists, we are socially responsible, culturally tolerant, personally ethical, informed by science, inspired by art and moved to compassion for others.

Please feel free to contact us through the resource of The Great Southern Humanist Society Meetup website, via email or in person as we commit ourselves to public community projects, social activism, charity and volunteerism!

[Lisa0315]

Despite the misreprentation of some of Christ's followers and the ignorance of some of His enemies, Jesus would approve of love, empathy, compassion, and kindness. In fact, if all of mankind were to do these things, no other laws would be needed, and no punishment for breaking of those laws would be required. Indeed, there would not even be a need for a Saviour.

[Ronin]

Despite the misreprentation of some of Christ's followers and the ignorance of some of His enemies, Jesus would approve of love, empathy, compassion, and kindness. In fact, if all of mankind were to do these things, no other laws would be needed, and no punishment for breaking of those laws would be required. Indeed, there would not even be a need for a Saviour.

How do you know?

Further, why should it be assumed that scriptural text that doesn't conform to and directly conflicts with the assertion that "Jesus would approve" happens to be a "misrepresentation"?

The mythos of Jesus introduces the concept of hell for non-believers in him and him as his own father. Further, it specifically states the punishment for those folk wrapped up in "the world" aka lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.

I'm fairly certain that if the text is what we "interpreters" have to go by in order to assess if morality and ethics are stated and practiced we would come to recognize that they cannot be reconciled in the Jewish, Catholic, Islamic, Protestant or Mormon ideologies.

When these religions are studied comparatively we can see that they are not peaceful, loving or based upon human liberty, empathy, compassion for "others" or reciprocity.

The adherents keep saying they are, but the readings state that they plainly are not.

[Jobar]

Wordy, there's a strong thread of all those things included in the Humanist movement.

In the past I've argued against the Christian imperative to 'love thine enemies'. (On a purely philosophical/ethical basis; of course one can readily demonstrate that any organized form of Christianity never demonstrates that sort of love. But some individual Christians may attempt to do it.)

It's a terrible truth that many human beings- most, I think- will take those who try to practice that sort of love for all their wealth, their freedom, and eventually for their lives. So such pure and unquestioning love is impossible to maintain in the real world.

[Jobar]

By the way, this may evolve into a discussion more appropriate for Religions. If it does, I'll move it there.

[Ada]

Despite the misreprentation of some of Christ's followers and the ignorance of some of His enemies, Jesus would approve of love, empathy, compassion, and kindness. In fact, if all of mankind were to do these things, no other laws would be needed, and no punishment for breaking of those laws would be required. Indeed, there would not even be a need for a Saviour.

I think many philosophers formulated principles or ideals which if applied CORRECTLY would make whole humanity happy.
To quote just one - which I think is really cool ideal:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Karl Marx)
Practical attempts to implement that ideal (communist countries) failed so miserably.

I am very interested in reading about practical approaches to living life of love, empathy, compassion and kindness which does not require everybody to be of certain character.

:-) Ada

[Goldie]

Wordy, there's a strong thread of all those things included in the Humanist movement.

In the past I've argued against the Christian imperative to 'love thine enemies'. (On a purely philosophical/ethical basis; of course one can readily demonstrate that any organized form of Christianity never demonstrates that sort of love. But some individual Christians may attempt to do it.)

It's a terrible truth that many human beings- most, I think- will take those who try to practice that sort of love for all their wealth, their freedom, and eventually for their lives. So such pure and unquestioning love is impossible to maintain in the real world.

I have forgiven the unforgivable...by anyone's standards and all done as an atheist, because I felt it was the right thing to do.

No God had anything to do with it. It is in my make-up to do so. I can, so I did.
Most Christians I know could never do it.

[Lisa0315]

Despite the misreprentation of some of Christ's followers and the ignorance of some of His enemies, Jesus would approve of love, empathy, compassion, and kindness. In fact, if all of mankind were to do these things, no other laws would be needed, and no punishment for breaking of those laws would be required. Indeed, there would not even be a need for a Saviour.

I think many philosophers formulated principles or ideals which if applied CORRECTLY would make whole humanity happy.
To quote just one - which I think is really cool ideal:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" (Karl Marx)
Practical attempts to implement that ideal (communist countries) failed so miserably.

I am very interested in reading about practical approaches to living life of love, empathy, compassion and kindness which does not require everybody to be of certain character.

:-) Ada

How very true. Even the early Christian church was a communist organization although I would give my pastor a heart attack if he ever heard me say that. Still, it was certainly a "everyone contribute the skills and goods that they have for the whole of the community" kind of deal.

For me, trying to be loving, it has to do with forgiveness. You simply cannot be loving to someone that you hold a grudge against, at least, not without being passive aggressive. So, for me, loving and forgiving people is a healing tool for myself. I benefit far more from loving and forgiving than the people I am loving and forgiving. Does that make sense?

What is that line in the Beatles song? And In the End, The love you take is equal to the love you make.

Lisa

[Moriah Conquering Wind]

Love that list (http://secularcafe.org/showpost.php?p=14962&postcount=5), Ronin.

Let's add to it:

"I believe that no entity in the entire universe, regardless of station or power, real or perceived, has the right to simply kill, destroy, or torture anyone/everyone who disagrees with them merely to avoid having to face up to their hypocrisy, double-standards, deceit, and egomaniacal bullshit."

Or something like that.

[epepke]

I agree, but put sex and sexuality in there somewhere, too.

A healthy sexuality it like the petroleum that drives the rest. Without sexuality, the rest become vapid or Thanatous.

[Jobar]

Wordy, there's a strong thread of all those things included in the Humanist movement.

In the past I've argued against the Christian imperative to 'love thine enemies'. (On a purely philosophical/ethical basis; of course one can readily demonstrate that any organized form of Christianity never demonstrates that sort of love. But some individual Christians may attempt to do it.)

It's a terrible truth that many human beings- most, I think- will take those who try to practice that sort of love for all their wealth, their freedom, and eventually for their lives. So such pure and unquestioning love is impossible to maintain in the real world.

I have forgiven the unforgivable...by anyone's standards and all done as an atheist, because I felt it was the right thing to do.

No God had anything to do with it. It is in my make-up to do so. I can, so I did.
Most Christians I know could never do it.

But forgiveness isn't love, Goldie.

There's plenty of times when forgiveness is simply the best alternative. Revenge is often impractical, even when it isn't flat impossible; and forgiveness means that you don't have to carry around that hatred. And I've always felt "the best revenge is living well."

But the Christian imperative is to love your enemies, not just to forgive them.

[epepke]

But the Christian imperative is to love your enemies, not just to forgive them.

Nothing pisses them off more.

[Jobar]

I don't know about that. If I were going to live my life by the Iron Rule, and do unto others as I damned well pleased, I think I'd be delighted if others then treated me by the Golden Rule. It would make everything easy, and I could take merciless advantage and never have to worry about the ones I take advantage of ever doing anything about it.

[wordy]

but the word forgive maybe has very individual interpretation or usage then.

Sometimes when people use it it means more like let go of the feeling of being mistreated cause the longing for doing revenge is more costly than the lost face of letting it just pass by without getting upset about it.

who cares? or Whatever! Don't have passions for it to be fair. Don't attache any feelings or relation to it.

I have very mixed feelings about it. If one just let things slip by they grow out of proportion. If no betrayal of common trust in the other never get uphold then too few will try to uphold it, social chaos with looting and free riding will abound.

[wordy]

The good thing about the Platina rule os that it force us to be good at really getting where the others are. One learn about not only the others but also about oneself in the process.

A kind of healthy humbleness that it is almost impossible to know what the others are up to. One can live ten years in same household and share same bed without really knowing the other.

I am maybe a bad example but it tool me first 20 years to get to know myself well enough to get aware of that I also had religious feelings but still 20 years later I still fail to find words for what it is to have religious feelings when one are an atheist.

The word is not explaining it. Confusion abound or it is not a good way to say that one have religious feelings cause it is forever related to the faith in god forever.

As if one could only have those feelings if one had faith in a god.

I compare with love for a human. I still have feelings for my first crush. She is together with another guy so it is not much to do about it. And he most likely are better at satisfying her needs too so I doubt I could get her love ever. I am not on her level of want???

So what kind of feelings is it that I have for her? It feels like love but it is not realistic it is more like longing for to have that kind of relation or something. Same with my latest GF. I still feel like I did when we separated and she most likely did love me too.

But it would be not realistic at all to get back together cause it doesn't work for us.

So I had to let her go and do what she wants to do. But the feelings is there but there are no good words for explaining them cause they are only supposed to be there if one have faith in the response from the object being loved.

I am not sure of spelling but crush is that a regular word or slang? Heheheh maybe I have a crush on or for god? :D

I mean I know that he doesn't exists but I have a crush on the cultural concept of god.

[Ronin]

Love that list (http://secularcafe.org/showpost.php?p=14962&postcount=5), Ronin.

Let's add to it:

"I believe that no entity in the entire universe, regardless of station or power, real or perceived, has the right to simply kill, destroy, or torture anyone/everyone who disagrees with them merely to avoid having to face up to their hypocrisy, double-standards, deceit, and egomaniacal bullshit."

Or something like that.

Done!

...and thanks.

I'm participating in a few other discussions regarding morality on other forums and that fits nicely into the theme.