Editing Morality (section)

=== Positions ===
Within the wide range of moral traditions, religious value-systems co-exist with contemporary secular frameworks such as [[consequentialism]], [[freethought]], [[humanism]], [[utilitarianism]], and others. There are many types of religious value-systems. Modern [[monotheistic]] religions, such as [[Islam]], [[Judaism]], [[Christianity]], and to a certain degree others such as [[Sikhism]] and [[Zoroastrianism]], define right and wrong by the laws and rules as set forth by their respective [[scriptures]] and as interpreted by [[religious leader]]s within each respective faith. Other religions spanning [[pantheistic]] to [[nontheistic]] tend to be less absolute. For example, within [[Buddhism]], the intention of the individual and the circumstances should be accounted for in the form of [[Merit (Buddhism)|merit]], to determine if an action is termed right or wrong.<ref>Peggy Morgan, "Buddhism". In {{cite book |title= Ethical Issues in Six Religious Traditions | edition= Second |editor1-first=  Peggy |editor1-last= Morgan |editor2-first= Clive A. | editor2-last= Lawton |year= 2007 |publisher= Columbia University Press |isbn= 978-0-7486-2330-3 | pages= 61, 88–89}}</ref> [[Barbara Stoler Miller]] points out a further disparity between the values of religious traditions, stating that in [[Hinduism]], "practically, right and wrong are decided according to the categories of social rank, kinship, and stages of life. For modern Westerners, who have been raised on ideals of universality and [[egalitarianism]], this relativity of values and obligations is the aspect of Hinduism most difficult to understand".<ref>{{cite book | title= The Bhagavad Gita: Krishna's Counsel in Time of War | last=  Miller |first = Barbara Stoler| year = 2004 |publisher= Random House | location= New York|isbn= 978-0-553-21365-2 |page= 3}}</ref>

Religions provide different ways of dealing with moral dilemmas. For example, Hinduism lacks any absolute prohibition on killing, recognizing that it "may be inevitable and indeed necessary" in certain circumstances.<ref>Werner Menski, "Hinduism". In {{cite book | title= Ethical Issues in Six Religious Traditions | edition= Second |editor1-first=  Peggy |editor1-last= Morgan |editor2-first= Clive A. | editor2-last= Lawton |year= 2007 |publisher= Columbia University Press |isbn= 978-0-7486-2330-3 | page= 5}}</ref> Monotheistic traditions view certain acts—such as [[abortion]] or [[divorce]]—in more absolute terms.{{Ref label|A|a|none}} Religion is not always positively associated with morality. Philosopher [[David Hume]] stated that "the greatest crimes have been found, in many instances, to be compatible with a [[superstitious]] [[piety]] and devotion; Hence it is justly regarded as unsafe to draw any inference in favor of a man's morals, from the fervor or strictness of his religious exercises, even though he himself believe them sincere."<ref>[[David Hume]], "The Natural History of Religion". In {{cite book|title= The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever|title-link= The Portable Atheist|editor-last= Hitchens|editor-first= Christopher|editor-link= Christopher Hitchens |year= 2007|publisher= Da Capo Press|location= Philadelphia|isbn= 978-0-306-81608-6|page= 30}}</ref>

Religious value-systems can be used to justify acts that are contrary to general contemporary morality, such as [[massacre]]s, [[misogyny]] and [[slavery]]. For example, [[Simon Blackburn]] states that "apologists for Hinduism defend or explain away its involvement with the [[caste system]], and apologists for Islam defend or explain away its harsh penal code or its attitude to women and infidels".<ref>{{cite book | title= Ethics: A Very Short Introduction |last= Blackburn |first= Simon|author-link= Simon Blackburn |year= 2001 |publisher= Oxford University Press |location= Oxford |isbn= 978-0-19-280442-6 |page= 13}}</ref> In regard to Christianity, he states that the "[[Bible]] can be read as giving us a carte blanche for harsh attitudes to children, the mentally handicapped, animals, the environment, the divorced, unbelievers, people with various sexual habits, and elderly women",<ref>{{cite book | title= Ethics: A Very Short Introduction |last= Blackburn |first= Simon |author-link= Simon Blackburn |year= 2001 |publisher= Oxford University Press |location= Oxford |isbn= 978-0-19-280442-6 |page= 12}}</ref> and notes morally-suspect themes in the Bible's [[New Testament]] as well.<ref>{{cite book | title= Ethics: A Very Short Introduction |last= Blackburn |first= Simon|author-link= Simon Blackburn |year= 2001 |publisher= Oxford University Press |location= Oxford |isbn= 978-0-19-280442-6 |pages= 11–12}}</ref>{{Ref label|E|e|none}} [[Elizabeth S. Anderson|Elizabeth Anderson]] likewise holds that "the Bible contains both good and evil teachings", and it is "morally inconsistent".<ref>[[Elizabeth S. Anderson|Elizabeth Anderson]], "If God is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?" In {{cite book|title= The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever|title-link= The Portable Atheist|publisher= Da Capo Press|year= 2007|isbn= 978-0-306-81608-6|editor-last= Hitchens|editor-first= Christopher|editor-link= Christopher Hitchens|location= Philadelphia|page= 336}}</ref> Christian [[apologists]] address Blackburn's viewpoints<ref name="colley1">{{cite web|last= Colley|first= Caleb|title= Is Christianity a Threat to Ethics?|url= http://espanol.apologeticspress.org/articles/240427|publisher= Apologetics Press|access-date= 3 May 2012}}</ref> and construe that [[Halakha|Jewish laws]] in the [[Hebrew Bible]] showed the evolution of moral standards towards protecting the vulnerable, imposing a death penalty on those pursuing slavery and treating slaves as persons and not as property.<ref name="enrichmentjournal1">{{cite web |url= http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201102/201102_108_slavery.htm.cfm |title= Does the Old Testament Endorse Slavery? An Overview |publisher= Enrichmentjournal.ag.org |access-date=2012-05-06 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20181005034831/http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201102/201102_108_slavery.htm.cfm |archive-date= 2018-10-05 |url-status= dead }}</ref> Humanists like [[Paul Kurtz]] believe that we can identify [[moral value]]s across cultures, even if we do not appeal to a supernatural or universalist understanding of principles – values including integrity, trustworthiness, benevolence, and fairness. These values can be resources for finding common ground between believers and nonbelievers.<ref>See Weber, Eric Thomas. "[http://www.ericthomasweber.org/Weber-RPRH.pdf Religion, Public Reason, and Humanism: Paul Kurtz on Fallibilism and Ethics] {{webarchive|url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131014235128/http://www.ericthomasweber.org/Weber-RPRH.pdf |date=2013-10-14 }}." ''Contemporary Pragmatism'' 5, Issue 2 (2008): 131–47.</ref>