The Opening Statement

A Discussion of Life, God, and Our Natural Order

Morality

Morality is the act of judging willful actions—or proposed actions—against a belief system.

For my belief system, this does not require many words.

I believe we were created free. We are free to think and act in any manner that does not infringe upon our neighbors’ equal right to do the same.

This principle would result in a very small law book. It aligns perfectly with the Covenant I believe we share with God and with one another. Free will is not an accident; it is a central feature of God’s ingenious plan.

Responsibility Within Freedom

The morality of any action can be evaluated by considering its impact on all individuals within its orbit. This includes not only those directly affected, but also those indirectly influenced, now and in the future. We must include ourselves within its orbit as some actions that cause self-harm could indirectly impact others if the outcome created additional burdens on them. Because of this, morality is rarely simple in practice, even when the rule itself is simple.

Freedom does not eliminate responsibility—it creates it.

The responsibility for a specific harmful action could be viewed in a couple of ways.

1. If a person commits an act that intentionally or recklessly causes harm, the person would be liable, and morally responsible.
2. If the act causes harm but not intentional or reckless, the person would still be liable, but not morally responsible.

A person can also be morally responsible for inactions. Inactions that cause undue burdens or restrict the freedom or well-being of others could be deemed immoral.

Analyzing every possible action or inaction during this discussion would be impractical and is beyond the scope of this opening statement. However, what matters is not having a rule for every situation, but setting the groundwork for honest reflection:

• Who might this effect?
• Does it restrict another’s freedom?
• Does it impose a burden I would not accept myself?
• Does it set an example worthy of emulation?

This approach to morality requires us to accept that good intentions do not guarantee good outcomes and that unintended consequences are still our responsibility. It also requires us to remain open to correction when new information reveals harm we did not initially see.

Freedom and responsibility can coexist—where people are not controlled by fear of punishment but guided by respect for one another and their rights as equals.

Good and Evil

In the previous section, we discussed the morality of behavior. We have the right to judge a person’s behavior, actions, or inactions, but the same does not apply to a person’s character.

We are not privy to every action nor the intent of another individual. We cannot know their heart. Therefore, we cannot pass definitive judgment on character.

However, we cannot avoid making general assessments of a person’s nature or character. It may sound good to say that we never judge others, but is that true? Even without thinking about it, we absorb impressions based on the information at hand. It is instinctive and an important part of our defense system.

Good

I believe that good is the top rung on the character ladder. Good does not mean free of fault. A person of good character lives their life respectful of others and makes mostly good choices. However, good people are capable of big mistakes. Good people accept responsibility for their mistakes, dust themselves off, and go back at it.

Good also has power beyond the outcomes it produces. It tends to inspire good in others. Doing good can be quite addictive. It brings about a sense of fulfillment and self-worth. Do good, rinse, and repeat.

Evil Bad

I do not feel the same about evil. Evil exists only in behavior and has no power over us other than the outcomes created by evil behavior. I do not use the word “evil” to describe a person’s character. It has an unredeemable tone.

The concepts of evil could be a topic for future discussions. For this discussion, I will limit it to these points:

Earlier, I stated that the flesh/body side of us was created in the image of our forefathers. Our lineage over generations determines many of our traits, both physical and mental.

Although I do not believe that people can be evil, there can be defects/disorders that affect their reasoning as well as physical well-being. Some of these disorders could have lasting effects on their behavior.

There can also be environmental influences, drug or alcohol abuse, or a host of other potential root causes that could have long-term effects on behavior.

These behaviors may pose serious threats to the well-being of others as well as themselves. For this reason, it may require that a person be quarantined from society until proven rehabilitated or cured.

Good, Gooder, Goodest

“Good” is the target and the highest rung on the character ladder. Even language resists comparisons like gooder or goodest.

Terms like “great” and “perfect” are typically not associated with character. “Great” is associated more with achievement, while “perfect” might describe physical quality.

A person may appear perfect and yet lack goodness. Another may achieve great things without being good of character.

I suggest that even if perfect and great were considered as character rankings, you would still not likely choose them over good.

Here’s the test:

You have three children; we will name them Perfect, Great, and Good.

Each child tried their very best in this test.

• Perfect produced 100 good outcomes,
• Great produced 75 good outcomes,
• Good produced only 50.

Is there any child you would love more than Good?