English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

11 answers

I think we have come a little too far to consider environmental issue just in term of ethical or even moral codes of collective and personal living. It is the time when these are seriously realistic concerns, and they have started to enter into the circles of our needs at a collective global level – it is responsibility of east to consider matter of the west and it is a liability of the south what happens in the north. The world is a small place now, and we all are habitants of a global village. The situation is stringent of not dire, as it is a matter of do or die. It is no longer an obligation like the obligations we have - and that we resent so much that we have – as suggested by religion, or our values encoded as common morality.

The simple and stark reality is that the global climate is at the brink of a mega disaster, the like of which is unprecedented in the known human history. It is therefore an imperative in which we have is no choice, ethical, moral or religious choice. There is no God put in the equation of environmental imbalance. It is all science. Remember? It is the very science that has paved the way for half of the mankind to develop thoughtlessly and haplessly over the past about two hundred years.

But should there be God? Should we invoke our spiritual zeal to check upon our progressive materialistic needs? Or should there be prevailing sense of morality in place, so strong as to enable us to control of our own ravenous and freakish nature, that would not rest until it consumes all and then more if possible on other plants if found.

How can we control the pace of progress in our own purposes that is proving to be so harmful for a wider world around? The human a nature that once we trusted and that once was a major and authentic source of human pride, and that is now coming to clash with the general nature of things around, the universe. The moderation in life that religion teaches us could be the only solution for the problems to which we see no solution. Where our science has failed our spiritual beliefs might rise again and do the work, proving to be the hand of God in a real sense.

2007-06-07 04:43:30 · answer #1 · answered by Shahid 7 · 0 0

You are looking at this from a skewed perspective. The problem you fail to take into account is the fact that morality and ethics are nowhere near as relative as you think they are. Morals and ethics are simply the natural by-products of human socialization. It is clearly evidenced by following the development of human societies that, at some point, every society ever created realized that some moral and ethical code is absolutely necessary for human survival. Without a generalized consensus on what would be acceptable and unacceptable behaviors, ALL human societies would have collapsed. The development of moral and ethical conduct naturally followed. Further, morals and ethics are some of the LEAST relative things amongst humans. Think about it...virtually every society holds the same moral precepts...things like theft, murder, arson, assault, lying, etc. are frowned upon from culture to culture, from society to society. However, how different societies and cultures respond to inappropriate behavior IS relative. For example, if you get caught with a few ounces of pot in the U.S., chances are you won't face a very severe penalty, but if you get caught in Turkey, you'll probably do a ten year prison bid. The only reason religion ever entered into our moral and ethical development was when individuals wished to give some form of authority to their ideas. Religious ideology is not a necessary component of moral and ethical conduct.

2016-05-18 23:38:28 · answer #2 · answered by kelli 3 · 0 0

“The meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.”—Psalm 37:11, KJ.

“Inherit the earth”—what an exciting prospect! But can we be sure that this is not just another crafty scheme designed to deprive people of something? Yes, we can. Since the earth is part of Jehovah’s marvelous creation, he as the Maker and Owner has the legal right to bequeath it to whomever he chooses. Through King David, Jehovah made this prophetic promise to His beloved Son, Jesus Christ: “Ask of me, that I may give nations as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your own possession.” (Psalm 2:8) For this reason, the apostle Paul described Jesus as the one “whom [God] appointed heir of all things.” (Hebrews 1:2) We can, therefore, have full confidence that when Jesus said that the meek “shall inherit the earth,” he did so in good faith, and he has the proper authority to fulfill his promise.—Matthew 28:18.

The crucial question, then, is, How will that promise come true? Everywhere we look today, it seems that the aggressive and the high-minded are gaining the upper hand and are taking what they want. Where do the meek come into the picture? In addition, the earth is plagued by serious problems with pollution, and its resources are being exploited by the greedy and the shortsighted. Will there even be an earth worth inheriting?

2007-06-07 03:33:01 · answer #3 · answered by John L 2 · 0 0

religion doesn't say anything nice .. at least not Christianity .. God created everything for man ... and he's just to use it as much as he can ... that logic got us where we are now. No respect for life in general (other than human) and no environmental awareness ... if "believers" do think of this planet's future, they do it only for the sake of future humans, so, if a certain specie's extinction is not to endanger existence of humans, they - d o n ' t c a r e - if it dies or not ... I really hope it's all going to change soon.

2007-06-07 04:20:55 · answer #4 · answered by tricky 5 · 0 0

They can't even agree on God and what he said or didn't say, so I wouldn't trust them with the environment!
The bible does say we are to look after the earth and it makes commonsense if we and our families are to live on it.

Morality is more to do with human relationships but I suppose if the actions of the western nations are causing those in third world countries to die or suffer hardship, then that is a moral question we need to address.

2007-06-07 03:37:29 · answer #5 · answered by malcolm g 5 · 0 0

Religion was created by humanity because it had no understanding of the world around it, religion and gods generated easy asnwers for things we couldn't understand. Religion doesn't concern itself with problems totally inconceivable at the time of it's creation.

2007-06-07 03:34:49 · answer #6 · answered by 203 7 · 0 0

Honey... there are hundreds of religions and prob a few dozen schools of morality and ethics.

So the answer would be, they say to get involved and not to get involved in fixing and harming the environment.

And they say "the environment doesn't exist except in your mind, except when it does.

2007-06-07 03:27:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Most religions do not concern themselves with anything other than people.

Morality would dictate that we should protect our environment for the sake of those who come after us.

2007-06-07 03:21:41 · answer #8 · answered by the_lipsiot 7 · 1 0

As a Christian I believe that we have to take care of the planet for the sake of future generations.

2007-06-07 03:25:22 · answer #9 · answered by Amelie 6 · 0 1

That first & foremost, we are to take care of the Earth & all that is on it.

2007-06-07 03:19:31 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers