In response to Gilbert's msg of Jul 24/06: Gilbert,
You had another opportunity to list your "Rock Solid Moral Code". You failed. It's likely your cravenness prevented you from putting yourself out on a limb. Good for you. But your temerity did not prevent you from handing out sanctimonious rebukes. Your sermao about wife, mai, pai, divorce, pre/extra-marital sex.....wherever that came from....is a good attempt by you to confuse the original request from me..."sarkem goddxem kellem mure". First you wiggled out saying its not about the Christian moral code (just like Mario), then you said its not about the list but about the enforcement by soceity. I'll give you your correction, that you and Mario are "inherently supporting the view that TRUE followers of specific religions, are MORE LIKELY TO BE morally superior to Atheists and Agnostics." And I'll say - FALSE. You are wrong to take that ARROGANT stand. And that is the root of what I'm contesting. Just take the recent example provided by Tony Barros - its more than likely that the people who practiced casteism in Tanga were 'good' Catholics. And its also likely that the rioters in Sanvordem in March 2006 were practising Hindus. Their actions are definitely contradictory to their morals and beliefs. What about the US Catholic Church ? Nobody wants to hear about that! How can you explain to us that these people were morally superior to everyday Atheists and Agnostics ? And talking of the riots of Sanvordem, there was a deafening silence from the Christian quarter here only to be resurrected with the brutal murder of Fr. Eusebio. Where were the superior moralists at that time ?? And Mario, Where can I start with you......you must be dizzy with all the spinning you have been doing lately to avoid answering a direct query? I did not ask for your POINTS or AIRMILES; I asked for a list of moral codes. So difficult for you to stay on topic.....here's a quote..... "This is the same illogical thinking that your intellectual icon Santosh has followed..." My 'intellectual icon'? Are you so full of contempt that you think me intellectually inferior to require an icon ? Does anybody need an intellectual icon to speak his mind here? There is very little that can be debated or discussed with you, if you exude this air of superiority. To quote Gilbert.....you are wearing your halo too tight. As I explained to George Pinto two nights ago.....this is how some Goanetters eg. Mario Goveia, practices censorship. Intimidation and insulting. Since you are unable to list the moral codes as requested and instead are pointing to the Golden Rule......I'd like to ask you is there any religion other than Satanism that does not have the Ethic of Reciprocity included as their core moral ? The Bahá'ís, Confucianism, Islam, Roman Pagans, Shinto.......all support the Rule of Reciprocity. Even Ron Hubbard's Scientologists. Philosophers and independent thinkers Epictetus, Plato, Socrates have all expounded their versions of this Rule. But then again the Holy Books of many religions have passages that contradict their own Golden Rule. So we should restrain ourselves from claiming any religion to be superior, as all religions have their own distinct irrationalities. With re to this thread, I'd like to remind you that the genesis of this thread was the discussions about the banning of the DaVinci Code in Goa. * On June 3/06, Santosh Helekar made the following post: This is to remind ourselves that the notion that a moral compass or social conscience is dependent on adherence to some form of ideology, religion or atheistic belief system, has been thoroughly discredited in this and other Goan forums. It has also been shown that no religion, ideology or atheistic belief system has ever had a rock-solid moral compass. * And on the same day June 3/06, Mario Goveia responded: I agree with Santosh's redundant reminder that an individual's moral compass is theoretically not dependent on any ideology or religious or non-religious belief, and that the results can be the same on a day-to-day basis. So even after agreeing to Santosh's assertion, Mario also wanted to do, what he does worst.....argue for the sake of arguing. It is this superiority complex (that includes insulting and name-calling) that is like an inflammed ulcer in his otherwise suave delivery of prose. And in doing so, he has succeeded in fooling some that he is standing up against Catholic-bashing, all because he is debating Santosh, an avowed irreligionist. * And here is a gem from Gilbert Lawrence on July 1/06: I cannot understand why atheists cannot proclaim their virtues without condemning / denigrating religion. And the reverse is also true! Thus all can show some degree of sensitivity and good judgement. So with the above, Gilbert is conceding that the religionists (Gilbert and Mario) are denigrating atheists too. Why? Performing immoral acts in support of their moral codes ?? Why do Gilbert and Mario think they are nailed to the moral high ground? I'd like to draw your attention to Domnic Fernandes' Aichea Disak Chintop of Jul 23/06 Munxeaponnachi mot eke sontre porim; ti ugtti astannam ekdom bori cholta. (The human mind is like an umbrella; it functions best when open.) Quote from The Dalai Lama: "Every religion emphasizes human improvement, love, respect for others, sharing other people's suffering. On these lines every religion had more or less the same viewpoint and the same goal." In closing......whether we are Catholics, Hindus, Agnostics, Atheists or in- between......lets keep an open mind while exploring our spirituality and faith. However lets restrain ourselves from trying to grab the moral high ground for ourselves. Best - Bosco T-dot PS. This is my second and last post on this thread. Of course, Mario must have the last word. _______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list Goanet@lists.goanet.org http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org