When it comes to morality, I’m not sure Shark and Shepherd knows what the flock he’s talking about.

In Mundy on Moral Values, generic viagra tadalafil Rick Esenberg of Shark and Shepherd seems to be saying that there is little value in a moral code that does not rely on – or perhaps embrace – religion as its ultimate source.

I would argue the opposite. The perils of basing morality on a religious foundation are many:

1.) By linking morality intrinsically to religion you beg the question, discount cialis capsule which religion? Would the morals of a Mormen be the same as a Mayan? And if not, which are “correct?”

2.) It frees an atheist or an agnostic to believe that no code of morality applies to him or her.

3.) It ultimately reduces all moral imperatives to “because God said so.”
To turn Rick’s words around on him, that seems like pretty thin intellectual gruel to me.

A well-reasoned moral schema that does not rely on religion avoids all these pitfalls.

I have no objection to including religion in any discussion about morality.

But I disagree that such a discussion would be more valuable, effective, or intellectually satisfying than one that makes sense without resorting to that deus ex machina of virtue: religion.

Forgive the headling, Rick. The pun was too good/bad to resist.

11 comments January 29th, 2006