Hi everyone!
I hope all of you are well. We had a great meeting today - twenty-one people in attendance (maybe more - I don't remember if people came after I counted.) At the opening of the meeting, I mentioned that Ann Brady, Joe Lantz, Lyn McCoy (who sent me some information on the Congressional Freethought Caucus,
which led me to this), and I have all been promoted to Co-Organizers and are planning to put together some new initiatives to help the group grow interactively and transparently. Also, we would like a single coop jet. Kidding. Seriously, if anyone has ideas for new activities, volunteering, or modifications that we could make, please let us know. Afterwards, we discussed, again, the objectivity of morality... um... at first. As usual, the conversation wended its way around to it over and over again after finding various tangents to follow.
Lily opened up with a thought experiment very similar to this one I plagiarized from the internet:
It's war time, and you're hiding in a basement with a group of other people. Enemy soldiers are approaching outside and will be drawn to any sound. If you're found, you'll all be killed immediately. A baby hiding with you starts to cry loudly and cannot be stopped. Smothering it to death is the only way to silence it, saving the lives of everyone in the room. Assume that the parents of the baby are unknown and not present and there will be no penalty for killing the child. Could you be the one who smothered it if no one else would?
(There's an article in first link on that page, but the morality quiz has been taken down. Perhaps, we live in too different a world than that of 2007...)
We batted a few notions around dealing with the morality of killing and the subjectivity of what makes something "good."
Historical relativism made its predictable appearance, as did
Godwin's Law. This segued (a few times in different directions) into the polarization of politics. Ann narrated a very good model of what it might look like if the United States were to descend into... well, where we have descended, with the dividing up of families as something that some people might find morally excusable. What some of us might, with a bit of acidic taste in our mouths, refer to as "the New Normal."
Joe(y) brought up the quote from Martin Niem
öller:
Rob made a lot of good points regarding historical relativism, regarding whether or not someone would be able to understand that their society was wrong if it had been normalized for them for their entire lives. A couple people pointed out that anything like slavery or human sacrifice would have been probably seen as not great from the point of view of the slaves and sacrifices - no matter how the oppressors saw it. That having been said, I think a great number of people echoed the idea that they would be able to allow for someone to die for the greater good, but they would not be able to kill for it.
That having been said, and I mentioned this during the meetup, if any thinking person were to weigh heaven and hell, it would be completely rational to do whatever necessary to attain one and escape the other. To wit, if they can get you to believe absurdities, they can get you to commit atrocities. (Francie sent me
this related article.) Simply because a society socializes something into normality doesn't mean that everyone is going to accept it. Otherwise, we might never have social progress. After all, how hard would it be to discount the cries of people who have been degraded by a society to be seen as inhuman. We would have had no progress if our empathy couldn't overpower conditioning - if that makes sense.
And, as Rob pointed out, we've lived through some pretty tremendous and positive social change. While all of that seems threatened right now, there have been a number of smaller, local victories. These may translate into greater ones as time goes on. The important thing is to stay sane about what we think and do. There was a great amount of discussion dealing with the political left being pulled right in America and the inherent danger therein. Most of Europe would see the American left as, perhaps, center right. Whereas our right wing would seem ultra-nationalist to many Europeans. Our far right would be quite literally illegal in many places.
In summation, we, as members of the most stigmatized group in the United States, do actually live in a golden era, in the sense that we cannot yet be imprisoned in our home country for our beliefs, but that we must be ready to be as politically active as possible to prevent backsliding in terms of civil rights and liberties. Yes, morality may be subjective, but history (provided that there are people left to write it) will judge us on where we stand right now. I know that there is a variety of political opinions within this mailing list, but I do believe that we all share more than separates us as far as looking at something like civil rights.
After all, who wants to have to go to church?
Lastly, check this website from time to time to see some changes. Joe and I will be attacking it a bit here and there. Have a great one, and I hope to see any and all of you at Secular Sunday!!!