We have duty to share morals with others
March 12, 2013 12:11 AM | 850 views | 2 2 comments | 6 6 recommendations | email to a friend | print
DEAR EDITOR:

The recent column by Dr. Melvyn Fein on morality and the letter from Ed Buckner addressing Mr. Fein’s article have moved me to do something I have for so long resisted and that is to speak out. I, as many others, have remained silent, as the general condition of our wonderful country and its great and varied people has declined. I do not speak now as an innocent observer. I bear my part of the burden for that situation as I am of the generation that spent more than we produced and indulged in physical pleasures often damaging to our health.

Yet, it is neither the economy, nor the endless political battles between the right and left, that concern me most. It is that we seem to have forgotten the fundamental nature of us human beings and how to relate to one another.

We are not just physical animals occupying space for a time on the planet earth. Our nature is also spiritual. It is fundamental. It may make us uncomfortable, but it is part of our makeup, no matter what any individual may believe about there being a God or there being no God.

Each of us knows there are limits to man’s ability to understand. We are unable to determine what is the ultimate smallest particle of matter or what may be the ultimate largeness of space.

While we should embrace advancements in science that help us understand more and more, our fundamental nature ought not to be denied.

To establish a moral code for human beings without consideration of our spiritual nature would only serve part of what we are. It would be as if a diet were established to feed only part of our body. Secular has many definitions, generally it means worldly rather than spiritual.

Why not consider the whole of our nature rather than only the worldly or only the spiritual in the search for a moral code? How would we treat love of each other in such a code? Would it be worldly love or spiritual love? I suggest it be both and that it would be a good place for Mr. Fein and Mr. Buckner to start. Each of these fellows is gifted with intellect and they ought to be encouraged to share their thoughts and suggestions on principles that might be part of a moral code for a good and healthy life.

We have a duty (and yes, a moral responsibility) to share such matters with the generations behind us.

Robert J. Grayson

Marietta
Comments
(2)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
EMBuckner
|
March 12, 2013
I agree with much of what Mr. Grayson wrote--but if Melvyn Fein, Robert Grayson, or anyone else wants my cooperation in building a more moral society, the conversation cannot begin with the conclusion that there is in fact a "spiritual" aspect of our natures. I am convinced that "worldly" is all there is. I don't think an organization has to adopt my view to be successful, but it cannot ignore my view if I'm to be involved somehow. --Ed Buckner
Don Hill
|
March 14, 2013
Mr. Buckner, I appreciate your concern based on your beliefs and I don't believe Mr. Grayson intended to negate your worldly perspective or even begin the conversation from just a spiritual point of view. Mel Fein is attempting to bring back a moral foundation that he and frankly I agree has been on the decline in our nation for sometime. You have one view and others have another, both need to be discussed in civil discourse and both have valid arguments that need to be debated. This is not a conversation about which view is right and which is wrong it is about bringing about a higher moral standand to our society and culture.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides