Showing posts with label conscience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conscience. Show all posts

Sunday, December 6, 2015

Evil is Not Good

On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, at about 6:59 p.m. UTC, 10:59 a.m. PST, two people killed 14 others at a holiday office party in San Bernardino, California.

The killers were located and stopped a few hours later, and died during an armed confrontation with law enforcement. I put names of the dead, and a few links, at the end of this post.1

I'm still experiencing anger, disgust, and several other emotions in connection with this latest mass murder. It's an unpleasant sensation, but I'd probably be more concerned if I didn't notice any emotional response.

Being Human


Experiencing emotion is part of being human. Emotions are "...the connection between the life of the senses and the life of the mind...." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1764)

Reason is part of being human, too. But I have free will, so thinking is an option: not a requirement. I'm better off if I think before I act, though. (Catechism, 311, 1730, 1778, 1804, 2339)

Being angry, or sad, or disgusted, isn't good or bad by itself. What matters is what I decide to do about the feelings. (Catechism, 1762-1770)

If I let my anger or disgust grow into hate, directed at the killers or anyone else — that would be a very bad idea. (March 1, 2015; July 13, 2014)

Emotions 'just happen,' and anger can turn to hate, eventually turning to the desire to kill another person. It's 'natural.' So: why is letting murderous rage take over my mind a bad idea? Isn't 'letting nature take its course' the 'natural' thing to do?

Maybe it is. But letting a situation develop without intervention or interference isn't an option when I can reasonably predict bad results.

If I was a perfect human, I would love and desire what is good. I might be angry at the evil actions acts of another person, and love the person committing them. (Catechism, 1765, 1933)

But I'm not perfect. I inherited a wounded nature, and deal with the consequences of a profoundly wrong choice made by the first of us. (Catechism, 390, 396-401, 1707)

What I do matters because I'm human: a creature made from the stuff of this world, filled with God's breath; someone, not something.

It's not just me: all humans matter. We are made "in the divine image:" beings made of matter and spirit, body and soul. (Genesis 1:27, 2:7; Catechism, 355, 357, 362-368)

Jiminy Cricket and "a Law of the Mind"


I think some things folks do are "good," in the ethical sense; and some actions are "bad."

I use my conscience to tell which is which. I'd better explain that.

My conscience is not my list of likes and dislikes, or the social sense that tells me what to wear when I go outside: although the latter is a little closer to the mark.

One of my culture's clearer definitions of "conscience" is from a 1940 musical fantasy, "Pinocchio:"
"A conscience is that still small voice people won't listen to."
(Jiminy Cricket, in Walt Disney's "Pinocchio;" via wikia.com)
I don't yearn for the "good old days," and that's another topic. Topics. (July 12, 2015; May 3, 2015; August 29, 2014)

I'm a Catholic, so my conscience is a "law of the mind:" "a judgment of reason" showing me whether something I'm about to do is good or bad.2 (Catechism, 1778)

My conscience isn't what I think should be so, or shouldn't be. It builds on natural law, ethical principles woven into reality, and is a part of me that I'll be educating as long as I live. (Catechism, 1776-1785)

How natural law is applied varies a great deal. Folks in different cultures and eras face different circumstances. But the underlying principles of natural law do not change.3 (Catechism, 1789)

Doing evil so that good will follow is never acceptable, for example; we must always respect our neighbor, and our neighbor's conscience; and the Golden Rule always applies. (Matthew 7:12; Catechism, 1789, 1957-1958, 1954-1960, 2259-2262, 2268-2270)

Think!


The basics are simple: love God, love my neighbors, see everyone as my neighbor, and treat others as I'd like to be treated. (Matthew 5:43-44, 7:12, 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Luke 6:31 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism, 1789)

Living as if the basics matter is not easy, but hating my neighbor is never an option — not even if my neighbor does something that's very bad. (September 6, 2015; July 5, 2015; January 18, 2015)

Judging whether an act is good or bad is part of using my conscience: it's a basic requirement for being human. I'm even expected to think about the actions of others. (Catechism, 1778, 2401-2449)

Think about it: I'm not loving my neighbor, if I see nothing wrong with someone stealing my neighbor's lawn mower: or killing my other neighbors.

It's a matter of hating the sin, loving the sinner: and leaving the judging of persons to God. (Catechism, 1861)

I must not let myself hate the couple who murdered more than a dozen people in San Bernardino this week. That's because all humans are people, with equal dignity: no matter where our ancestors are from, or how we act. (Catechism, 360, 1700-1706, 1932-1933, 1935)

Not hating the killers is one thing. Not seeing mass murder as an evil act is — more than daft. Human life is sacred. Every person's life is precious and murder is wrong: no matter how annoying, useless, or inconvenient their existence is. (Catechism, 2258, 2268-2283)

More about life, death, and acting as if love matters:
1 Mass murder; November 2, 2015; in San Bernardino, California:
  • Victims
    • Aurora Godoy, 26
    • Bennetta Bet-Badal, 46
    • Damian Meins, 58
    • Harry Bowman, 46
    • Isaac Amanios, 60
    • Juan Espinoza, 50
    • Larry Kaufman, 42
    • Michael Wetzel, 37
    • Nicholas Thalasinos, 52
    • Robert Adams, 40
    • Shannon Johnson, 45
    • Sierra Clayborn, 27
    • Tin Nguyen, 31
    • Yvette Velasco, 27
      (Source: Reuters)
  • Killers
    • Syed Rizwan Farook, 28
    • Tashfeen Malik, 27
      (Source: Reuters)
News and background:
2 A Catholic view of "conscience:"
"CONSCIENCE: The interior voice of a human being, within whose heart the inner law of God is inscribed. Moral conscience is a judgment of practical reason about the moral quality of a human action. It moves a person at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil (1777-1778). An examination of conscience is recommended as a preparation for the reception of the Sacrament of Penance (1454)."
(Catechism, Glossary, C)
3 Some of my take on morality, ethics, natural law, and all that:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, May 17, 2015

Boston Bombing Verdict: Death, Life, Consequences

At 2:49:43 and 2:49:57 pm EDT/18:49 UTC, April 15, 2013, two pressure cooker bombs exploded on Boylston Street near Copley Square in Boston.

They were about 210 yards, 190 meters, apart; near the finish line of the Boston Marathon.

Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev's bombs killed Krystle Marie Campbell, Lu Lingzi (吕令子), Martin William Richard, and Sean A. Collier.

Dzhokhar said that he and his brother wanted to defend Islam from America. I think their experiences as Chechens and Avars may have been a factor, too.

Don't expect a rant against Muslims, 'foreigners,' Americans, or anyone else. I think it's noteworthy that the imam of a prominent Boston mosque apparently refused to give Tamerlan a Muslim burial. The imam's decision may or may not be justified.

Lost Lives, Lost Limbs



(From Aaron "tango" Tang; via flickr.com, Wikimedia Commons; used w/o permission.)
(Less than two minutes after the explosions at the Boston Marathon. April 15 2013.)

Krystle Marie Campbell, 29, was a restaurant manager from Medford, Massachusetts. Lu Lingzi (吕令子), 23, was a Chinese national and Boston University graduate student from Shenyang, Liaoning. Martin William Richard, eight, had been watching the race with his family.

A few days later, the Tsarnaev brothers ambushed and killed Sean A. Collier, an MIT police officer. Boston Police Officer Dennis Simmonds' death, a year later, was most likely due in part to being shot in a confrontation with the bombers after midnight, April 19, 2013.

At least 14 of the 264 folks injured in the explosions lost limbs. Two lost more than one limb. (USA Today)

There is no excuse for this. Murder, killing innocent people, is wrong. I'll get back to that.

Consequences


Tamerlan Tsarnaev has not been sentenced: and won't be. He's dead, killed during that April 19, 2013, confrontation.

The surviving Tsarnaev brother is still alive, and probably will be for at least a few more years. He has, however, been sentenced to death by lethal injection.
"Boston bombing trial: Death sentence for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev"
BBC News (April 15, 2015)

"A US jury has sentenced Boston bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death by lethal injection....

"...After 14 hours of deliberations, the jury concluded that Tsarnaev showed no remorse and therefore should be put to death....

"...Massachusetts as a state ended the death penalty in 1984, but Tsarnaev was tried on federal charges, meaning he was eligible for execution.

"After the sentence was announced, US Attorney General Loretta Lynch said: 'The ultimate penalty is a fitting punishment for this horrific crime and we hope that the completion of this prosecution will bring some measure of closure to the victims and their families.'..."
I certainly understand being angry about what happened in Boston on April 15, 2013. I have felt, and feel, a desire to punish those responsible. I'm sure that those who knew the victims feel this desire more intensely.

I think there is no reasonable doubt that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, together with his dead brother, is responsible for intentionally killing several people; and maiming more than a dozen.

But no matter how emotionally satisfying it might be to kill Dzhokhar Tsarnaev — his death will not restore life to those he killed, or limbs to those he maimed.

Do I think he deserves to die? Yes: at least in the sense that he shares responsibility with his dead brother for several unjustified deaths.

Do I think he should be executed? Probably not. I don't think he should be released, either. Anyone who thinks that "defending" his faith means killing innocent people must be restrained.

Safeguarding the common good by imprisoning folks who will kill others makes sense. But a well-intentioned desire to make angry citizens feel better is not, I think, a good reason for killing a prisoner.

I can't say that the death penalty is always wrong. The Catholic Church allows capital punishment: if a society can't defend human lives any other way. (Catechism, 2266-2267)

Life, Death, and Eternity



(From Aaron "tango" Tang; via flickr.com, Wikimedia Commons; used w/o permission.)
(Boylston Street near Copley Square, about three minutes after the explosions.)

Human life is sacred. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)

We're made in the image of God. Each of us is a person: someone, not something; filled with God's 'breath:' matter and spirit, body and soul. That's why it's wrong to kill an innocent person. (Genesis 2:7; Catechism, 355, 357, 362-368, 2258-2262)

Okay — but let's say that someone attack me, and obviously wants to kill me. If the only way to stop that person is killing him: is that wrong?

Let's see what St. Thomas Aquinas wrote:
"Nothing hinders one act from having two effects, only one of which is intended, while the other is beside the intention. Now moral acts take their species according to what is intended, and not according to what is beside the intention, since this is accidental as explained above (Question [43], Article [3]; FS, Question [12], Article [1]). Accordingly the act of self-defense may have two effects, one is the saving of one's life, the other is the slaying of the aggressor. Therefore this act, since one's intention is to save one's own life, is not unlawful, seeing that it is natural to everything to keep itself in 'being,' as far as possible. And yet, though proceeding from a good intention, an act may be rendered unlawful, if it be out of proportion to the end...."
("The Summa Theologica," Question 64, Article 7, St. Thomas Aquinas) (translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger Bros. edition, 1947))
In this happily-hypothetical case, I may defend myself: even if that act results in the death of the attacker. It's not quite that simple, though. My hypothetical attacker is human, too: so causing that person's death is wrong, unless it really is the only way I'll survive. (Catechism, 2263-2264)

Getting back to the sadly-real Boston Marathon bombing, it's remotely possible that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's lawyers will keep his case in the courts until he dies of old age. My guess is that America's national government will kill him before that happens: legally, after well-documented court proceedings.

I am certain that killing folks at the 2013 Boston Marathon was wrong: but I have no idea where the killers will spend eternity.

Having a conscience means making reasoned judgments about whether my actions are right or wrong is. I can even see what others do, and make similar distinctions, but "we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God." (Catechism, 1778-1779, 1861)

"And Who is my Neighbor?"


Why aren't I ranting about Tamerlan Tsarnaev roasting in eternal hellfire?

The short answer is that I'm a Christian, a Catholic: and I take our Lord seriously. Matthew 7:1 and all that.

The long answer — could fill a book. "Summa Theologica," St. Thomas Aquinas's unfinished discussion of Catholic theology, runs to about 3,500 pages; and that's another topic.

As I've said before, my faith's basics are simple: love God, love my neighbors, see everyone as my neighbor, and treat others as I'd like to be treated. (Matthew 5:43-44, 7:12, 22:36-40, Mark 12:28-31; Luke 6:31 10:25-27, 29-37; Catechism, 1789)

The story of the good Samaritan answers the question, "who is my neighbor?" (May 10, 2015; October 26, 2014)

Everyone is my neighbor: relatives, friends, the family across the street, even enemies. (Matthew 5:43-44; Romans 5:10; Catechism, 1825)

Loving my neighbor isn't even close to hoping that my neighbor spends eternity in Hell.

Time to Think


"Love" isn't "approval." Sometimes the loving thing to do is keeping someone from doing wrong. (August 24, 2014; April 26, 2011)

And sometimes it's giving the loved one time to think about what they've done.

Alessandro Serenelli, for example, arguably deserved death for the murder of a young woman. Instead, he was sentenced to 30 years of hard labor.

Six years later, he realized that killing her was wrong. After he'd served his sentence, the community where he'd lived didn't want him back. He eventually died, an old man, in a Capuchin monastery.

Sometimes a murderer decides that what he or she did was wrong: and wants God's forgiveness.

That's why I hope Dzhokhar Tsarnaev gets what his brother didn't: time to think.

Posts; mostly about life, death, and looking ahead:
News and views:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, December 29, 2013

Newtown, Connecticut: Mass Murder, Assumptions, and Judgment


(Andrew O'Reilly, via Fox News Latino, used w/o permission.)
"The grave of Ana Grace Márquez-Greene at the Newtown Village Cemetery. Ana Grace's parents began the Ana Grace Project shortly after he[r] death to help communities identify children with mental problems and works to prevent similar tragedies to the Sandy Hook shooting. (Photo: Andrew O'Reilly)"

Sandy Hood Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, is in the news again.

Someone killed about two dozen people there last December, most of them children. He then killed himself.

Authorities have released documents which give a bit more information about the killer than we had last year. He was a young man, and apparently not a particularly happy one.

I am sorry that he is dead, for several reasons: and very sorry indeed that so many innocent people stopped living that day.

Assumptions

I don't think more than a few crackpots will assume that elementary schools should be closed because they cause mass murders, or that automobiles should be banned because they make people kill children.

Given some of today's largely-unconsidered assumptions, though, other goofy ideas may get seriously discussed.

It's possible that the young man had Asperger's syndrome. It's not associated with violent behavior, but it's a "syndrome," and many folks are nervous about 'crazy people.'

The killer was home schooled: for reasons that are obvious, given what we're learning about his behavior.

I don't think folks with Asperger's syndrome should be locked up, or that home schooling leads to mass murder: but my kids have been home schooled, and I've been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome — and you know what those people are like. ☺

Judgment, Good and Otherwise

Adam Lanza was 20 when he killed his mother, 20 first-graders, another six adults, and finally himself. As I said before, I'm sorry that all those folks are dead: including Adam Lanza.

Families and friends of the victims have suffered a great personal loss, and we have all lost whatever those 28 people might have contributed to our world. That's not the only reason for sorrow over their deaths, though.

Human life is sacred, and murder is wrong: even when the victim is oneself. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258, 2259-2262, 2268-2270, 2280-2283)

I think what Adam Lanza did was very wrong. There is no reasonable excuse for murder or suicide. Don't expect a rant about 'that sinner over there' going to Hell, though. I've read about the fellow who prayed to himself, and the one who had some sense. (Luke 18, 10-14)

I'm a Catholic, and although I'm expected to notice whether behavior is good or evil — judging the spiritual state of others is strictly against the rules. It's also a profoundly bad idea.

I've got this one life, followed by a performance review. (Matthew 7:5, Romans 2:1-11, Hebrews 9:27, Catechism, 1021-1022, 1749-1756, 1777-1782, 1861, 2283)

After that there's creation's closing ceremony, and that's another topic. (May 21, 2011)


(From Hieronymus Bosch, via Wikimedia Commons, used w/o permission.)

In the news:
Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Friday, December 14, 2012

Conscience in the News; a Radar Map of Titan; Exploring Mars

I'll probably have two 'in the news' posts this week: this one, with good news from Illinois; and two items that I found fascinating. Your experience may vary:
  1. Illinois Against Pharmacists: Sometimes Conscience Wins
  2. Titan's Longest Known River, So Far
  3. Another Picture from Mars
I plan to have a second post ready later today: with good news from New York State; not-so-good news; and something about next week's Mayan calendar rollover.

As usual, I've got something to say before getting to the news.

America is Okay - - -

I like some aspects of today's America: the comparative prosperity many of us enjoy; immigrants continuing to bring new ideas and enthusiasm; and a degree of freedom.

I particularly like being free to express opinions, even if the folks in charge don't approve.

- - - And We Can Do Better

This is far from Western civilization's, and America's, most tranquil era. If I was satisfied with the status quo, I'd probably be upset.

Some of the reforms 'those crazy kids' like me worked for didn't turn out as advertised. I think we can do better.

I also remember the 'good old days' when the establishment was a great deal paler, and nearly all male. I really don't want to go back to the 'good old days.' My memory's too good.

Change Can be Good - - -

I'm too young to remember older 'good old days' when "Irish Need Not Apply" signs affected some of my ancestors. We 'look Anglo,' which other Americans don't.

I remember when America finally sorted out the mess left by Dred Scott v. Sandford. More recently, Americans who had been robbed and imprisoned by the national government during World War II experienced some measure of justice. (April 9, 2012; Another War-on-Terror Blog (January 22, 2009))

Change happens. Change can be good.

- - - Or Not

Hostility toward the Catholic Church is an old American tradition. What's changed recently is that suspicion and hostility has been extended to most religions.

I don't see that as an improvement. At all.


(from H.E. Fowler, via Wikipedia, used w/o permission)
"Crowley, Jeremiah J. (1913) 'The Pope: Chief of White Slavers High Priest of Intrigue,' p. 430"

But change happens, and individuals can still make a difference.

Some folks don't like change, or freedom: particularly if they they're part of 'the establishment,' and that's almost another topic.

Now, finally, my take on this week's news.

1. Illinois Against Pharmacists: Sometimes Conscience Wins

"Illinois pharmacist ruling praised as conscience victory"
CNA (Catholic News Agency) (December 13, 2012)

"Religious liberty advocates are hailing the end of a seven-year legal battle over the required provision of abortion drugs in Illinois pharmacies as a major triumph for conscience rights.

" 'This decision is a great victory for religious freedom,' said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which has represented the pharmacists in the case for several years.

" 'The government shouldn’t kick business owners out of the market just because it dislikes their religious beliefs,' he said in a statement.

" 'Over seven years of litigation, there was never a shred of proof that a religious objection at a pharmacy harmed anyone,' Rienzi explained. 'These pharmacists do a wonderful job serving their communities, and the state’s decision not to appeal lets them get back to that important work.'..."
This is good news for me: and for anyone who lives in America and doesn't want the government telling us what we're allowed to believe, and what beliefs aren't permitted.

The connection between religious freedom and forcing pharmacists to give women 'kill my baby' pills may not be obvious. I don't think killing innocent people is right, by the way: and that's another topic.

Legal, Yes: Right, No

Some religions, including mine, teach that killing an innocent person is wrong. We're not even allowed to help someone else commit murder. For Catholics, this rule applies even if we're in a country where murder is legal.

As a practicing Catholic, I wouldn't be allowed to change your mind, even if I had that power. But I would prefer living in a country where I'm allowed to act as if God matters.

Facts and Freedom

Sure, I could move to another country, but on the whole I like being an American. Besides, the "my way or the highway" attitude didn't sit well with me in the '60s, and it still doesn't. (February 29, 2012)

Folks like Jeremiah J. Crowley are wrong. The Catholic Church doesn't want to enslave people. I've posted this outline of what the Catholic Church really says before:
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Some actions are always wrong
    (Catechism, 1789)
    • Even if the President says it's okay
      (Catechism, 2242)
  • Human life
    • Is sacred
      (Catechism, 2258)
    • Begins at conception
      • (Catechism, 2270, 2274)
  • Murder is wrong
    (Catechism, 2259-2262, 2268-2269)
Maybe you've tangled with a Catholic who tried to drag you, kicking and screaming, into a church. At least one Catholic was a mass murderer, but he wasn't typical. Neither is Alessandro Serenelli, and that's another topic:

Supporting Freedom

I've mentioned the Becket Fund, and another advocacy group, before. It's nice to know that someone's willing to fight city hall, and win:

2. Titan's Longest Known River, So Far

"Cassini Spots Mini Nile River on Saturn Moon"
Mission News, NASA (December 21, 2012)

"Scientists with NASA's Cassini mission have spotted what appears to be a miniature, extraterrestrial likeness of Earth's Nile River: a river valley on Saturn's moon Titan that stretches more than 200 miles (400 kilometers) from its 'headwaters' to a large sea. It is the first time images have revealed a river system this vast and in such high resolution anywhere other than Earth.

"Scientists deduce that the river, which is in Titan's north polar region, is filled with liquid hydrocarbons because it appears dark along its entire length in the high-resolution radar image, indicating a smooth surface.

" 'Though there are some short, local meanders, the relative straightness of the river valley suggests it follows the trace of at least one fault, similar to other large rivers running into the southern margin of this same Titan sea,' said Jani Radebaugh, a Cassini radar team associate at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. 'Such faults - fractures in Titan's bedrock -- may not imply plate tectonics, like on Earth, but still lead to the opening of basins and perhaps to the formation of the giant seas themselves.'..."
Radar maps of Titan show lakes and rivers: but they're apparently filled with liquid hydrocarbons like methane. There's water on Titan, but it won't be flowing.

Temperatures during warm day near Titan's equator are around 290 degrees below zero, Fahrenheit (-179 Celsius).

Part of what fascinates me about Titan is that it's the first world, other than our own, with rivers and lakes.
"...'Titan is the only place we've found besides Earth that has a liquid in continuous movement on its surface,' said Steve Wall, the radar deputy team lead, based at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory...."
(CasMission News, NASA)
The Cassini spacecraft is still orbiting Saturn, and in good operating condition. I think we'll be learning a great deal more about Titan, the other moons of Saturn: and, of course, Saturn.

More:

3. Another Picture from Mars


(from NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS, used w/o permission)

"Layered Martian Outcrop 'Shaler' in 'Glenelg' Area

"The NASA Mars rover Curiosity used its Mast Camera (Mastcam) during the mission's 120th Martian day, or sol (Dec. 7, 2012), to record this view of a rock outcrop informally named 'Shaler.'

"The outcrop's striking layers, some at angles to each other in a pattern called crossbedding, made it a target of interest for the mission's science team. The site is near where three types of terrain meet at a place called 'Glenelg,' inside Gale Crater.

"The area covered by the image spans about 3 feet (90 centimeters) in the foreground. Figure 1 includes a 10-centimeter (4-inch) scale bar.

"The image has been white-balanced to show what the rock would look like if it were on Earth. Figure 2 is a raw-color version, showing what the rock looks like on Mars to the camera...."
(Mission News, NASA (December 11, 2012))

[Figure 1]

(from NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS, used w/o permission)

[Figure 2]
Here's what "Shaler" looks like, to Curiosity's camera:

(from NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS, used w/o permission)

Four Days, 260 Feet, and Dusty Sand on Mars

"Curiosity Rover Nearing Yellowknife Bay"
Mission News, NASA (December 11, 2012)

"The NASA Mars rover Curiosity drove 63 feet (19 meters) northeastward early Monday, Dec. 10, approaching a step down into a slightly lower area called 'Yellowknife Bay,' where researchers intend to choose a rock to drill.

"The drive was Curiosity's fourth consecutive driving day since leaving a site near an outcrop called 'Point Lake,' where it arrived last month. These drives totaled 260 feet (79 meters) and brought the mission's total odometry to 0.37 mile (598 meters).

"The route took the rover close to an outcrop called 'Shaler,' where scientists used Curiosity's Chemistry and Camera (ChemCam) instrument and Mast Camera (Mastcam) to assess the rock's composition and observe its layering. Before departure from Point Lake, a fourth sample of dusty sand that the rover had been carrying from the 'Rocknest' drift was ingested and analyzed by Curiosity's Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) instrument...."
As I've said before, this isn't the Mars we expected: not quite.

The reddish rocks in desert landscapes aren't all that much different from what scientists expected. There's even a reddish hue to the sky, particularly during dust storms.

But there aren't any Martians. Not of the "Man from Mars" variety, at least. We still aren't sure about microbes.

Instead of alien cities and intelligent Martians we're finding rocks, sand, and lots of dust. But we've also found that rivers once flowed on Mars: and at least some of the water is there, close to the surface.

I'm not disappointed.

More:

Science: And Religion?

If you've read my posts before, you've probably already seen this:
"...the things of the world
and the things of faith
derive from the same God..."
(Catechism of the Catholic Church, 159)

"...The beauty of creation reflects the infinite beauty of the Creator and ought to inspire the respect and submission of man's intellect and will."
(Catechism, 341)
I posted those quotes last week. (December 7, 2012)

My faith doesn't depend on keeping up with what we're learning about this astounding universe. But I don't see a point in deliberately avoiding that knowledge, either. Ignoring creation seems an odd way of showing respect for the Creator.

If you haven't gotten enough of my take on science, religion, faith, and reason, I've put links below. It's faith and reason, by the way, although I don't worship the Goddess of Reason. That would be idolatry, a very bad idea, and another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Conscience, Natural Law, and Religious Liberty

I'm putting original sin and all that on the back burner for now. It's an important topic, but I've learned that I can't always do everything at the same time.

Even after editing, this post is a long one. Maybe a list of headings will help you find something interesting. Or, not:
I ran across part of the Catechism that discusses religious liberty while writing yesterday's post. Since we're still in Fortnight For Freedom, I figured I'd write about religious freedom, ethics, and conscience, for this week's 'Bible and Catechism' post.

Right, Wrong, and Crazy

The idea that some things are right, and some things are wrong, no matter what the Supreme Court or an opinion poll say, is counter-cultural. At least for today's establishment.

So, apparently, is the idea that religious freedom involves letting people act as if God matters.

I suspect that many Americans fear 'religious people' getting political power for what seem like good reasons. I've explained how a particularly virulent sort of Christianity in my home area made me very curious about religion, among other things. I eventually became a Catholic.

I could have written off Christianity as a sort of psychiatric disorder. I didn't, partly because I knew about the Catholic Church's millennia-spanning, continuous, documented, history. (April 18, 2012, February 27, 2011)

(back to list of headings)

Long Hair, Music, and Me

One thing I learned from radio preachers of my youth was that they hated rock and roll, and long hair on men. Personal preferences are one thing: that lot acted as if God agreed with them on every point.

I changed my listening habits, started enjoying rock, and grew moderately long hair. Then, around my mid-to-late teens, I started going bald: and that's another topic.

I also began seeing inconsistencies between what the painfully pious people said, what they did, and what I learned when I studied the Bible

I never assumed that all Christians were hypocrites, but I could see why many of my contemporaries thought so. The more 'Biblical' of the 'good church-going people' often seemed to have few verses missing from their reading list:
"1 Therefore, you are without excuse, every one of you who passes judgment. 2 For by the standard by which you judge another you condemn yourself, since you, the judge, do the very same things. ... There is no partiality with God. "
(Romans 2:1-11)
One of the reasons I don't express a desire to see 'that sinner over there' burning in Hell is that my Lord wouldn't like it. (Matthew 7:1-5; Luke 6:37-38, 41-42; and see footnote 10 in Luke:6)

(back to list of headings)

Hypocrisy's Out: So is Stupidity

My Lord teaches us to love. Everybody. (Luke 6:35) He also said this:
"You hypocrite, 3 remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye."
(Matthew 7:5)
Looks like hypocrisy is out as a lifestyle option. And yes, I know about the pedophile priests. Moving on.

'Not judging others' doesn't mean putting my brain on 'hold,' and 'lovingly' accepting any behavior:
"1 [1-12] In ⇒ Matthew 7:1 Matthew returns to the basic traditional material of the sermon (⇒ Luke 6:37-38, ⇒ 41-42). The governing thought is the correspondence between conduct toward one's fellows and God's conduct toward the one so acting.

"2 [1] This is not a prohibition against recognizing the faults of others, which would be hardly compatible with ⇒ Matthew 7:5, 6 but against passing judgment in a spirit of arrogance, forgetful of one's own faults."
(Matthew 7, footnote 1, footnote 2)
"A spirit of arrogance" hurts the person harboring it. I think it hurts others, too: to the extent that they accept the distorted image of Christianity - or reject my Lord. Bottom line, hypocrisy is a bad idea.

So is 'letting friends drive drunk,' and ignoring other self-destructive behavior:
(back to list of headings)

Natural Rights, and Natural Law

I've discussed natural law before. It's the idea that ethical rules exist, and are as real as those of the physical world. I've put links to some of my take ethics, cause, and effect, under "Related posts," below.

The Catholic Church teaches that "every human person, created in the image of God" has natural rights, including the right to be:
  • Seen as a free and responsible being
    (Catechism, 1738)
  • Protected, when a guest
    • Includes reciprocal obligations
    • Applies to
      • Foreigners
      • Governments
    (Catechism, 2241)
  • Respected, to retain the honor of his
    • Name
    • Reputation
    (Catechism, 2479)
About the personal pronoun? That's the way English, my native language, works. (April 10, 2012)

(back to list of headings)

Religious Liberty

I've been spending an hour outside each evening praying during Fortnight For Freedom, together with a few dozen other folks. (June 25, 2012) Sometimes it's been hot, damp, work. I've kept going because I think religious freedom is important. For everybody.

I've posted this quite often:
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
Like I said before: as a practicing Catholic I can't 'be holy' for an hour on Sunday, and behave as if God doesn't matter the rest of the time. Friday's Supreme Court decision makes that a little more awkward. (June 29, 2012)

That's because I recognize an authority higher than the Supreme Court. In a nation with just laws, thinking that God has more authority than some judges wouldn't be a problem. One of my duties is to be a good citizen, and obey legitimate authorities. (Catechism, 2199, 1915, 2238-43, for starters)

However, being a good citizen doesn't extend to blindly obeying whatever the nearest ruler commands. Saying "I was only following orders" will not make everything okay. (June 26, 2012)

I've been over this before. Often:
The Catholic Church takes life, freedom, and conscience very seriously:
" 'Nobody may be forced to act against his convictions, nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience in religious matters in private or in public, alone or in association with others, within due limits.'34 This right is based on the very nature of the human person, whose dignity enables him freely to assent to the divine truth which transcends the temporal order. For this reason it 'continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it.'35"
(Catechism, 2106)
Oho! "...nor nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience..." That means that as long as I really believe that it's okay to kill my wife, or neighbor, or someone else, it's okay: right?

Wrong. I've already written about natural law: that's the "objective moral order" in this excerpt. Some things are, simply, wrong. No matter how sincere someone is, or how many people 'really believe:'
"The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a supposed right to error,37 but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint in religious matters by political authorities. This natural right ought to be acknowledged in the juridical order of society in such a way that it constitutes a civil right.38

"The right to religious liberty can of itself be neither unlimited nor limited only by a 'public order' conceived in a positivist or naturalist manner.39 The 'due limits' which are inherent in it must be determined for each social situation by political prudence, according to the requirements of the common good, and ratified by the civil authority in accordance with 'legal principles which are in conformity with the objective moral order.'40"
(Catechism, 2108-2109)
The Church thinks freedom is important: but so is truth. And responsibility. (Catechism, 1730-1742, 2464-2503)

Finally, about the words "naturalist" and "positivist," used in Catechism, 2108-2109:
  • Naturalist (noun)
    • An advocate of the doctrine that the world can be understood in scientific terms
    • A biologist knowledgeable about natural history (especially botany and zoology))
    (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Positivism (noun)
    • The form of empiricism that bases all knowledge on perceptual experience
      • Not on intuition or revelation
    • A quality or state characterized by certainty or acceptance or affirmation and dogmatic assertiveness
    (Princeton's WordNet)
  • Positivist
    • (Noun)
      • Someone who emphasizes observable facts and excludes metaphysical speculation about origins or ultimate causes
    • (Adjective)
      • Of or relating to positivism
    (Princeton's WordNet)
(back to list of headings)

Good grief. This post is long enough already. If you're interested, check out my take on science, reason, and getting a grip under "Related posts:"
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 28, 2012

Freedom Rosary: For Me, It's Personal

First, a clarification about the local freedom rosary's schedule. The plan here in Sauk Centre, Minnesota, is to pray each evening at 7:30 p.m.: including the evening of July 4. Now, on with this post.

Prenatal Testing? "It Depends:" Definitely

"Should expectant couples get prenatal testing?" (Paul Schlenker, Google+)

That's a good question. I firmly answered, 'yes; no; it depends:'
"For some couples, I think not getting prenatal testing might be a gross neglect of parental duty. Genetic disorders are known, which are much easier to deal with if they're caught early.

If, however, one assumes that prenatal testing always means killing a child who does not match expectations: in that case, it is not a good idea.

The issue isn't prenatal testing: it's why the technology is used."
(Brian Gill's comment on a post by Paul Schlenker, Google+ (June 27, 2012))
Bioethics questions involving birth defects and 'therapeutic' abortions are more than just public issues for me:

Freedom Rosary

It's the personal angle that makes going to my parish's 'freedom rosary' each evening easy. That, and the (so far) good weather.

I don't have statistics to back this up, but I think there's a higher percentage of folks with disabilities at these prayer meetings, than in the general population.

Part of that may be because 'they have nothing else to do:' although I'm an example of 'the disabled' who has held jobs. Granted, I'm retired now.

In my case, though, sitting outside with 50-plus other folks for an hour of prayer wasn't a matter of 'finding something to do.' Particularly when I can do online research:
Most days, I'm concerned about getting all the tasks done: not whiling away idle hours. And that's another topic.

Life, Conscience, and Me

I was in the garden between the parish church and the rectory yesterday evening, and plan to be back today, because I think:
  • Human life is sacred
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2258)
  • Religious freedom is vital
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)
  • Having an well-formed conscience is important
    (Catechism, 1776-1794)
  • Some actions are always wrong
    (Catechism, 1789)
    • Even if the President says it's okay
      (Catechism, 2242)
Catechism, 2242, doesn't specify "president." The document is for all Catholics, not just those living in America. The terms used are "civil authorities" and "public authority."

The point is that there's a moral order in creation that can't be changed by an act of Congress, presidential proclamation, or a Chancellor's emergency powers. Not even the Supreme Court of the United States has that sort of authority.

And that's yet another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Like it? Pin it, Plus it, - - -

Pinterest: My Stuff, and More

Visit Brian H.'s profile on Pinterest.

Advertisement

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Popular Posts

  • A 'Saint Brian,' Sort of
    My name is Brian Gill. In keeping with the customs of my culture, the first name is one which my parents chose for me, the last is the name ...
  • Mass Murder in Orlando
    I'd be writing a longer, more detailed, post about this; but still haven't resolved some technical issues. ( May 6, 2016 ; updated M...
  • Blind Mice; Heroism During the 'Batman' Killings
    The London 2012 Olympics start today: but instead of analyzing the significance of a South Korean flag being displayed with a North Korean...
  • Elijah and Pushing a Rock
    10th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 2016: 1 Kings 17:17 - 24 Galatians 1:11 - 19 Luke 7:11 - 17 Third Sunday of Easter, 2016 by Deacon L...
  • A Catholic Citizen in America: New Location
    The good news is still that Blogger's changes haven't made images in my posts here unviewable. ( May 6-16, 2016 ) Instead of jumpi...

Label Cloud

1277 abortion ADD ADHD-Inattentive Adoration Chapel Advent Afghanistan Africa America Amoris Laetitia angels animals annulment Annunciation anti-catholicism Antichrist apocalyptic ideas apparitions archaeology architecture Arianism art Asperger syndrome assumptions asteroid astronomy Australia authority balance and moderation baptism being Catholic beliefs bias Bible Bible and Catechism bioethics biology blogs brain Brazil business Canada capital punishment Caritas in Veritate Catechism Catholic Church Catholic counter-culture Catholicism change happens charisms charity Chile China Christianity Christmas citizenship climate change climatology cloning comets common good common sense Communion community compassion confirmation conscience conversion Corpus Christi cosmology creation credibility crime crucifix Crucifixion Cuba culture dance dark night of the soul death depression designer babies despair detachment devotion discipline disease diversity divination Divine Mercy divorce Docetism domestic church dualism duty Easter economics education elections emotions England entertainment environmental issues Epiphany Establishment Clause ethics ethnicity Eucharist eugenics Europe evangelizing evolution exobiology exoplanets exorcism extremophiles faith faith and works family Father's Day Faust Faustus fear of the Lord fiction Final Judgment First Amendment forgiveness Fortnight For Freedom free will freedom fun genetics genocide geoengineering geology getting a grip global Gnosticism God God's will good judgment government gratitude great commission guest post guilt Haiti Halloween happiness hate health Heaven Hell HHS hierarchy history holidays Holy Family Holy See Holy Spirit holy water home schooling hope humility humor hypocrisy idolatry image of God images Immaculate Conception immigrants in the news Incarnation Independence Day India information technology Internet Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Japan Jesus John Paul II joy just war justice Kansas Kenya Knights of Columbus knowledge Korea language Last Judgment last things law learning Lent Lenten Chaplet life issues love magi magic Magisterium Manichaeism marriage martyrs Mary Mass materialism media medicine meditation Memorial Day mercy meteor meteorology Mexico Minnesota miracles Missouri moderation modesty Monophysitism Mother Teresa of Calcutta Mother's Day movies music Muslims myth natural law neighbor Nestorianism New Year's Eve New Zealand news Nietzsche obedience Oceania organization original sin paleontology parish Parousia penance penitence Pentecost Philippines physical disability physics pilgrimage politics Pope Pope in Germany 2011 population growth positive law poverty prayer predestination presumption pride priests prophets prostitution Providence Purgatory purpose quantum entanglement quotes reason redemption reflections relics religion religious freedom repentance Resurrection robots Roman Missal Third Edition rosaries rules sacramentals Sacraments Saints salvation schools science secondary causes SETI sex shrines sin slavery social justice solar planets soul South Sudan space aliens space exploration Spain spirituality stem cell research stereotypes stewardship stories storm Sudan suicide Sunday obligation superstition symbols technology temptation terraforming the establishment the human condition tolerance Tradition traffic Transfiguration Transubstantiation travel Trinity trust truth uncertainty United Kingdom universal destination of goods vacation Vatican Vatican II veneration vengeance Veterans Day videos virtue vlog vocations voting war warp drive theory wealth weather wisdom within reason work worship writing

Marian Apparition: Champion, Wisconsin

Background:Posts in this blog: In the news:

What's That Doing in a Nice Catholic Blog?

From time to time, a service that I use will display links to - odd - services and retailers.

I block a few of the more obvious dubious advertisers.

For example: psychic anything, numerology, mediums, and related practices are on the no-no list for Catholics. It has to do with the Church's stand on divination. I try to block those ads.

Sometime regrettable advertisements get through, anyway.

Bottom line? What that service displays reflects the local culture's norms, - not Catholic teaching.