Diane Ellis' post got me wondering: 

Just because you don't believe in God or an afterlife doesn't mean you don't believe in morality, ethics, the objective superiority of some ethical/moral systems over others, capitalism, federalism, personal responsibility, or the importance of family.

Just because you are pro-choice doesn't mean that you believe it's right to murder innocent people for the sake of convenience. It can just mean that you do not believe that sentience begins at conception, or that you feel that the well being of a spouse supersedes the needs of the child.

I don't see how atheism or being pro-choice, in and of themselves, any more disbars one from being a conservative than being homosexual or a polygamist. Am I missing something here?

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Nyadnar17
Joined
Dec '10
Nyadnar17

katievs

But we should judge their beliefs claims by their truth value (or disvalue as the case may be), their coherence, their logical consistency, etc.

Can we not take it is axiomatic that all of us ought to believe what is true, and ought not to believe what is false?

I think humility should be our guide here. I am Christian of the Calvinist variety. I have problem with the logical consistancy of the arguments of my Arminian and Catholic brothers and sisters, but I still refer to them as fellow Christians. It seems to me that if we religious folk are willing to allow for the difference between different denominations and sects in our own religion we should be just as tolerance if not more so in regards to our political beliefs.

Yes there are limits to what a person can believe and still be considered a conservative, but if someone if firmly convinced of the innate rights of a human why should we think of them as less of a conservative because they came to that belief by way of philosophy, Islam, Judaism, Wicca, Mormonism, or Catholicism as oppose to Protestantism?

raycon
Joined
Oct '10
raycon

Abdiel

raycon

 Without an immutable source, morality will always be defined to the convenience of the powerful.

And this is exactly what has happened throughout history. Slavery? Not abolished until it was made pointless by industrialism. The execution of heretics? Continued until there were too many to kill following the reformation. Absolute Monarchy? Politically unfeasible in modern times due to a number a factors none of which have anything to do with morality. Abortion? Still totally widespread, and you know why? Because it's convenient.

It appears that for 2000 years little has changed.  We sure have been lucky.  Guess you must be right, it all came from a vacuum.  Sort of a moral big bang.  Nothingness and then an explosion to the present circumstance where good and evil have clear definitions.  No God or other force involved, just the luck of the draw.  Interesting that we have spent over 120 posts and it still comes back to the question... Is there a Creator, and do you choose to acknowledge Him?  Each of us faces that question, and not only our eternity, but our present life's happiness depends on how we answer it.


Joined
Mar '11
Abdiel

raycon

We sure have been lucky.  Guess you must be right, it all came from a vacuum.  Sort of a moral big bang.  Nothingness and then an explosion to the present circumstance where good and evil have clear definitions.  No God or other force involved, just the luck of the draw.

I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. I'm more of a determinist than most, so as I see it morality arose out of necessity, and that couldn't have not happened. Once you have organisms as complex as us, with as large a capacity for suffering and joy as we have, morality comes naturally. Nothing random about it. Most mammals have a morality of some kind.


Joined
Jul '10
Palaeologus
JM Hanes: My religious beliefs are nobody's business but my own, and if conservative identification can hinge on any one issue, then there are a lot less conservatives around than our putative arbiters would like to think there are. 

Certainly, you're correct. But there must be a tipping-point somewhere, right?

It seems entirely plausible to me that one can be an atheist, pro-choice, conservative.

It would devolve into the ridiculous, though, to claim to be an avant-garde, socialist, internationalist, anti-family, protectionist, pacifist, moral relativist, deterministic materialist, crunchy, pro-choice, atheist, spendthrift, conservative.

I'm all in favor of a big tent, but there are limits. Right?

Robert E. Lee
Joined
Jun '10
Robert E. Lee

I'm Christian, Pro-choice, Anti-abortion, conservative in my values and liberal in my ideals.

I'm against abortion in general yet I believe the woman should have the right to choose, and I find it hypocritical those who believe big government should keep it's nose out of our business really seem to mean only their business, everyone else must submit every facet of their lives to them for approval.

I like the idea of people helping people, I don't mind helping out when it's my choice, but I want to know where the money is coming from.  I've heard a joke about a Republican and a Democrat walking down the street when they encounter a beggar.  The Republican reaches into his pocket and gives the woman $10.  The Democrat expresses shock, she hadn't known Republicans had hearts.  They walked down the street a little further and find another beggar.  The Democrat, not to be outdone, reaches into the Republican's pocket and gives the beggar $40.

Conservative is as conservative does, not what it demands others to do.

Jonathan Matthew Gilbert
Joined
Jul '10
Jonathan Matthew Gilbert

Tommy De Seno

Jonathan Matthew Gilbert: Always so nice to be lumped in with the polygamists, but I agree with the basic thesis here. I'm not pro-abortion but I do believe that it's a private medical decision--and one that involves the termination of a life, but I don't believe all human life to be inviolate (I'm strongly in favor of the death penalty, too). I'm more of a Barry Goldwater conservative: I think there are very strict limits to the places in a person's private life that the government can go. Out of the bedroom, out of the boardroom. · Apr 20 at 1:47pm

My decision to kill you would be equally as private. · Apr 20 at 1:50pm

Honestly? This is your response? How mature. 

Paul DeRocco
Joined
Aug '10
Paul DeRocco

I think the reason that support for abortion is hard to reconcile with conservatism is that its most passionate advocacy is rooted not in the mere non-personhood of an embryo but in the principles of contemporary feminism. This is a philosophy that insists we must regard abortion as a fundamental right of women, precisely because it evens the score with men, by canceling the unexpected nine-month commitment that no man ever has to face.

The root of the feminist tree is the idea that the very fact of gender is a blemish on humanity, a problem to be solved, even a crime to be punished. For all the various ways different cultures have dealt with gender throughout history, feminists' final solution is the utter abolition of all regard for gender as a meaningful human characteristic. Abortion is one tool in this abolition. There is perhaps no manifestation of contemporary leftism that is as radical as feminism, and to the extent that support for abortion reflects this attitude, it is about as far from conservatism as any idea could possibly be.

raycon
Joined
Oct '10
raycon

Robert E. Lee: I'm Christian, Pro-choice, Anti-abortion, conservative in my values and liberal in my ideals.

I'm against abortion in general yet I believe the woman should have the right to choose, and I find it hypocritical those who believe big government should keep it's nose out of our business really seem to mean only their business, everyone else must submit every facet of their lives to them for approval.· Apr 20 at 8:31pm

Perhaps the word conservative does not include Constitutionalist?  Were not the STATES given the power to pass whatever laws they choose, within Constitutional limits, and that part itself is a SCOTUS determination?

Before Roe v Wade, that was the status.  The rest is simply a tyrannical move by the Left. 

If you want Virginia out of your bedroom, you have that clearly Constitutional right to vote for it.  But keep your hands out of the bedrooms of the other 49 states, or is it 56.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Abdiel

raycon

We sure have been lucky.  Guess you must be right, it all came from a vacuum.  Sort of a moral big bang.  Nothingness and then an explosion to the present circumstance where good and evil have clear definitions.  No God or other force involved, just the luck of the draw.

I don't see how you've come to that conclusion. I'm more of a determinist than most, so as I see it morality arose out of necessity, and that couldn't have not happened. Once you have organisms as complex as us, with as large a capacity for suffering and joy as we have, morality comes naturally. Nothing random about it. Most mammals have a morality of some kind. · Apr 20 at 7:31pm

Morality and determinism seem to me mutually exclusive terms.

Freedom is the very essence of morality.  

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Robert E. Lee: I'm Christian, Pro-choice, Anti-abortion, conservative in my values and liberal in my ideals.

I'm against abortion in general yet I believe the woman should have the right to choose, and I find it hypocritical those who believe big government should keep it's nose out of our business really seem to mean only their business, everyone else must submit every facet of their lives to them for approval...

I cannot understand how anyone who identifies himself as a Christian, which means he believes that God Himself entered human history in the womb of a woman, can in the same sentence profess that a woman has a right to kill her in utero child.

Nor can I refrain from pointing out what an absurd straw man you set up in your description of pro-life conservatives.

What we believe is that the right to life is endowed by the Creator and is unalienable. Do you not believe that?

If you do, at what point do you think the Creator endows us with it?  At the moment of birth?  I ask sincerely.

Basil Fawlty
Joined
Mar '11
Basil Fawlty

Mark Belling Fan: I was at a Marquette University basketball game this past winter and saw a car in the parking lot with a bumper sticker that read "Pro Choice Catholic".

If you like the label conservative I guess have at it. · Apr 19 at 6:58pm

Was there a cafeteria in the vicinity?


Joined
Mar '11
Abdiel

katievs

Morality and determinism seem to me mutually exclusive terms.

Freedom is the very essence of morality.  

Certainly we can choose whether or not to act morally. But the compulsion to act morally is something we all share (except for sociopaths of course). The capacity for empathy and our conscience's all play a key role.

Determinism and free will aren't as mutually exclusive as they're made out to be.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Abdiel

katievs

Morality and determinism seem to me mutually exclusive terms.

Freedom is the very essence of morality.  

Certainly we can choose whether or not to act morally. But the compulsion to act morally is something we all share (except for sociopaths of course). The capacity for empathy and our conscience's all play a key role.

Determinism and free will aren't as mutually exclusive as they're made out to be. · Apr 21 at 6:45am

The fact that we all share it is no proof that it is a biologically determined compulsion.  That would be to conflate a correlation with a cause.

And if it is a compulsion, how is it that we can choose whether or not act morally? At what moment does compulsion yield to liberty?  How and why? 

If we are creatures of compulsion, what does it mean to act morally?  

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Nyadnar17

I am Christian of the Calvinist variety. I have problem with the logical consistancy of the arguments of my Arminian and Catholic brothers and sisters, but I still refer to them as fellow Christians. It seems to me that if we religious folk are willing to allow for the difference between different denominations and sects in our own religion we should be just as tolerance if not more so in regards to our political beliefs.

Since I'm Catholic, I'd be interested to know what "logical flaws" you see in my beliefs.

More directly to your point, though, let's distinguish between beliefs grounded in divine revelation and claims grounded in reason.

You don't believe the Immaculate Conception, while I do. You think grace is imputed, while I think it is transformative.These are theological differences.They have nothing to do with logic.

But if someone says that as a conservative he holds that rights are unalienable, while as a "pro-choicer" he thinks they can sometimes be alienated, I will point out the incoherence.

Finally, of course we should "allow for differences." We should also try to persuade each other to a better grasp of truth.

Edited on Apr 21, 2011 at 7:52am
jhimmi
Joined
Oct '10
jhimmi

The pro-choice argument that makes the most sense (to me) is that the only thing that could stop a pregnant woman from finding a way to abort her own fetus is a totalitarian state that would put Orwell to shame. The privacy argument falls apart, however, once you start regulating late term abortions - the 9 month old fetus is as private as the 1 month old fetus. I've never heard anyone mount a plausible defense to aborting a fetus that would certainly survive outside the womb.

The real problem, in my view, is the idea that a fetus is a clump of cells, no different than a tumor. If a woman wants to get an abortion, I don't want to tell her she can't, but I do want her to know what a fetus is, and what she's doing to it.


Joined
Mar '11
Abdiel

katievs

The fact that we all share it is no proof that it is a biologically determined compulsion.  That would be to conflate a correlation with a cause.

And if it is a compulsion, how is it that we can choose whether or not act morally? At what moment does compulsion yield to liberty?  How and why? 

If we are creatures of compulsion, what does it mean to act morally?   · Apr 21 at 6:52am

That's the thing, we don't all have empathy or a conscience (desire to do good/live with one's self). There are people born with the compulsion to do evil. Psychopathy has been linked to genetics. People do not choose to become psychopaths. There is a long history of science supporting a biological basis morality. Good people are still capable of ignoring their conscience (or just overwhelming it with stupidity), or deceiving themselves into thinking something evil is good. That's often where morality comes into the picture. Humans are capable of having contradictory impulses, and in such situations reason and morality help to solve those problems.

katievs
Joined
May '10
katievs

Okay, I'll rephrase by beginning my point with "setting aside pathological cases..."

Of course there is a biological basis for morality, just as there is a biological basis for human life.  If my brain were severely injured, my intelligence wouldn't be able to function.  If my nervous system went haywire, I wouldn't be able to control my movements.

My claim is that the moral life can't be reduced to biology, nor can it be explained in biological terms.  Biology refers the material organism; morality has mainly to do with the spiritual dimension of the person.


Joined
Mar '11
Abdiel

katievs:

My claim is that the moral life can't be reduced to biology, nor can it be explained in biological terms.  Biology refers the material organism; morality has mainly to do with the spiritual dimension of the person. · Apr 21 at 10:46am

What is the spiritual dimension? I've heard people use it numberless times, but I've never seen a clear definition.

Morality as I understand it comes about as a result of numerous emotional and cerebral factors, all of which are grounded in our biology/anatomy/genetics. I agree that history and philosophy/morality can't be summed up by determinism, that kind of reductionism is insufficient to explain the complexity in human thinking. At some point things become too complex to explain in terms of atoms and the exchanging of electrons. I just don't think metaphysics does any better.

But to explain the origins of morality, a bit of determinism does do some good. 

Edited on Apr 21, 2011 at 6:26pm

Joined
Feb '11
Ed Gorz

AmishDude

raycon

 

I have no idea what you are talking about. · Apr 20 at 9:00am

It's a reference to the famous speech at the end of A Few Good Men.

It's probably the most famous reference to "free riders".  Just trying to make a funny. · Apr 20 at 9:09am

Edited on Apr 20 at 09:11 am

Mission accomplished. That was hilarious!


Joined
Feb '11
Ed Gorz

Katievs, you are really stroking the ball nicely on this thread. Continue much longer on a streak like this and they'll call you up to the majors any day now.

Really, you are handling the topic quite articulately.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In