AMEN!! It's much easier to do wrong or evil than it is to do the right thing. It's our sinful nature. To do good is really the aberration. It takes an unselfish nature to put oneself aside to do for another when it doesn't benefit ourselves. Coming from a Christian background I believe it has to do with our new nature put inside us only from the Holy Spirit that we have the desire to do the right thing. Scripture over and over says that the heart is deceitful and wicked above all other things, who can know it? Everything comes from the heart. God says He will take out our heart of stone and put in a new heart made of flesh and that I believe is the only way one can be on the way to perfection. Never really getting there mind you but then and only then able to put oneself aside and do for another with totally unselfish motives. I know this cuz I've been on both sides. It's an awesome thing to have that heart of stone chipped away and replaced with the heart of flesh. It's a God thing!!

What about those who are, in D&D terms, Lawful Good yet aren't religious?

What about them?

I think it's just as obvious that in addition to their innate and inescapable potential for evil, humans have an innate and inescapable potential for good. Together, these two potentials produce an inner conflict which means that while no evil is beyond redemption, no good is perfect.

Even people who strive to be "Lawful Good" don't always succeed. This is exactly what I'm talking about. History tells us time and again that even a good man, with a good plan, will fall short of his ideals. Man has great moral strength, but also great moral weakness.

I don't even think "religion" is necessary, for Lawful Goodness. I think that the knowledge of Good, and the desire to accomplish Good things, is innate--part of human nature. But I think it's also clear that "Chaotic Evil" is also a part of human nature. Finally I think that the evidence shows that humans cannot resolve the conflict between Good and Evil by themselves. Every attempt to do so, throughout history, has failed. Most of these attempts have actually made things worse (e.g., applied Communism).

"Finally I think that the evidence shows that humans cannot resolve the conflict between Good and Evil by themselves."

Are you saying it's not resolvable or that the solution is non-human?

Ooh.

Good question.

I'm saying that if it is resolvable, its resolution must have a non- or super-human component. The record seems pretty clear that human components alone don't get the job done.

"The record seems pretty clear that human components alone don't get the job done."

Perhaps, but the record doesn't show that non- or super-human components would do a better job. Sounds similar to saying, "History has not shown that humans are capable of intergalactic travel. Hence, magic is the answer."

And I'm saying the super human component is non other than the HS. The power source behind our weaknesses. Why else would a killer (in the news recently) give himself up because a tiny woman told him about God and explained to him that we all have a purpose in life. She didn't do this without help, superhuman that is, and he didn't give himself up and let her live without that presence involved.

I'm saying that if it is resolvable, its resolution must have a non- or super-human component.

in other words, man may be smart enuff to choose for himself but can't be trusted to do so. and you're what kinda conservative again?

I am convinced that morality and religion are not interdependent. One can be a very moral person and be an athiest, or deeply religious. One can be deeply religious and be an evil and dangerous human being, or very moral. Religion can place morality onto those who may otherwise be immoral or amoral, maybe keeping some people in check. But those people would be immoral anyway, whereas morality is predominantly within the heart and intellect of a human being, devoid of religion.

Needless to say, I believe in secular humanism. I don't need religion to know not to steal and murder. Seems that a lot of organized religions sure do NOT know this, however. Throughout history, more people have died and been murdered in the name of religion; more valuables have been stolen in the name of religion. Seems that more damage has been done by religious institutions than not.

I'm not against religious people. I'm not against religions. What I really hate though, is this holier than thou kind of moralizing; this "I'm better than you" crap, base on religious doctrine.

I'm not against religious people. I'm not against religions. What I really hate though, is this holier than thou kind of moralizing; this "I'm better than you" crap, base on religious doctrine.

Christians, it seems, are the worst advertisement for Christianity.

I'm guessing then, you are among the "pro-moral" majority of citizens in the US.

Sadly, education, media, and government have all been abducted by a secular humanist minority, and you see the results.

Good morals are the base of a good society. When the statement of the era is, "There are no absolute truths, save the truth that there are no absolutes." it quickly becomes, "Relative is relative. You didn't kill someone, so raping them is ok."

Peace,

Beebes

You can be religious about anything......even about morality but it doesn't mean you have a changed heart. The outside may look whitewashed but inside is black as night. There is a difference between religion and relationship. You can call yourself anything even a Christian and not be one. A true Christian is a follower of.....CHRIST. Many say they are but in reality are not.....and that's why you have wars and such in the name of Christianity. Most churches today are religious but lost!! There's a battle going on for our souls and most haven't a clue....they're too busy having church dinners.

It's the "so called Christians" that are the worst advertisement for Christianity and they're doing a great job at causing mass loads of confusion.

When the statement of the era is, "There are no absolute truths, save the truth that there are no absolutes." it quickly becomes, "Relative is relative. You didn't kill someone, so raping them is ok."

while that may be a pretty niftily packaged opinion, there's really nothing there but a wild leap of logic.

When we remove God from moral equasions, we set man above all for determining right from wrong. The result of that is secular humanism, but when we then convince ourselves there *is* no absolute right and wrong, the result can only be a deterioration of our society.

so removing god from the moral equation ultimately leads to societal deterioration?

i'm left wondering which makes less sense: your conclusion or your use of drmiler's asterisks.

"so removing god from the moral equation ultimately leads to societal deterioration? "

YES YES YES,......BY GEORGE YOU'VE GOT IT!!!

If you doubt that, just open your eyes and look around. The school system is the first place to look.

If anyone says prayer in school is the answer to all of society's problems, I will go absolutely nuts.