Definitions - #301 – #45 - Do you believe "In God we trust", "The Creator" ....etc.

#7700 - #16

This is the question that starts most arguments!
If you don’t believe that the “moral values” (family values, basic human values of “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness”, etc.) come from a “religious” perspective (a human “story”) rather than an “unknown” human expression; you can’t believe in the Judo Christian ethic or the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, etc. You can’t be an “atheist” without an explanation of where the “value” system comes from. The mere fact that this “human story” is the answer that accommodates the deficiency of the human mind to cope with “ideas of Infinity” is not accepted by the 99% of the public.
It is all in the question of whether the human mind can cope with the ideas of “infinity”.

“Believing” in the so called “scientific” approach is simply rejected by the “religious” approach. Again, if you can’t say where the “human value” system comes from, you are, by some, to be discredited in society.

This is a dilemma!
This is a “dilemma” in many ways.
For instance, “The Christian ethic” is divided in many ways. There are Episcopalian, Born Again Christians, Catholics, etc. that all have written words. These words are interpreted daily by different people, in different times, in separate ways. Who or what is to say which is the “Christian” ethic? Not only are there over 400 “isms” (Judaism, Catholicism, Islamism, Buddhism, etc.) to tell a story of where all this started, but there are other explanations. Why are “space”, and “black holes” and other mathematical expressions of “chaos” and “time space relationships”, etc. separate from these discussions. After all, these are difficult to understand and we get to know more about them each day. Each day we get to know more about infinity, about energy, etc. We can explain more, we have a “story”, a set of human words that try to interpret what we’re finding out. At no time is this rhetoric disclaimed.
What then, about “Human Values”… their origin, their meaning, their acceptance. Are “they” universal? If so, why does one interpretation invalidate an other. Do we need a story, a separate story, for each interpretation? Is there such a thing as “universal” acceptance? Why do these things such as “individual acceptance” cause such harm in the history of man? Is it merely “humble” to accept ones deficiencies?
Is the need to have a “story” so important to the human race to require him to have an exact “story” for where Human Values come? Is the lack of being “humble” so important that NOT having a story makes that individual “unacceptable”?
Is “In God We Trust” so important? Is the word “God” so important, so meaningful, that we can separate people. Is “God” or the “Creator” or “Allah” or “Rhea” or…. so universal that we can accept them as “generic” names of respect. Is the “generic” term one of “disrespect”?

“Believing” in the so called “scientific” approach is simply rejected by the “religious” approach!
Again, if you can’t say where the “human value” system comes from, are you to be discredited in society?