At this point, it is important for the reader to recall I am adapting an essay by Einstein and to be alert to the quotation marks to capture his warmth in the following passages.
Guided by understanding, we need not respond to doctrine, like, “’Thou shalt not lie.’”
These principles expressed by Albert Einstein can be used by a people to establish civic morality, whereas religious morals are based on opinion and can never be resolved without physics-based ethics.
A people of the United States is attempting to recover from nearly four-hundred years’ involvement in slavery and consequential injustice. Slavery is still practiced in some countries. Imposition of slavery in this country was carried out by five European countries cooperating with Africans who sold Africans in the Atlantic slave trade. Abolitionism was alive in America with Philadelphia’s Quakers in 1758. In 1775, Thomas Paine wrote a scathing letter in opposition to Christianity’s involvement in slavery, and with Benjamin Franklin founded the Philadelphia Abolition society. Benjamin Franklin argued for abolition in the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The South Carolina declaration of secession cited religious opinion as the last in a list of reasons for the legislature's decision. Toward the end of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suggested that regardless of the outcome, both the South’s god and the North’s god will still be held as just and good (my paraphrase and irony if Lincoln would disagree). People who can brook self-contradiction may to this day cite Bible verses that seem to justify slavery, we may assume based on a white god. In opposition is “Black theology and the Black church,” which imply a black god. It seems reasonable that each person’s god should be in that person’s image--it's a matter of culture. However, a civic people do not base civic morality on religious beliefs.
Faith: personal trust and commitment by persons among a people
A child is conceived when an ovum from a woman is fertilized by sperm from a man, whether by nature or by technology.
The woman has continual dual autonomy: to herself and with her viable ova or conceptions
Ethical couples empower their conceptions’ opportunity for personal autonomy and beyond
A people need children for progress, not abuse or subjugation
No one knows if a god influences physics or not
Bristol University has a physics and ethics education program, PEEP, online. Its issues are more commercial and less socially bold than some of the above issues. They assert that lying is sometimes justified, and we oppose that advice.
Cynthia tells me physics-based ethics is common sense with a mediator when people disagree. Civic morality is based on physics.
For a people to not use physics-based ethics concerns me.
Note: the revision of "the ethics of physics" to "physics-based ethics" started with Doug Johnson's recent argument to me on the phone that "the physics of ethics" seemed more appropriate, because physics drives humans to ethics. He was joined on June 20 at a library discussion by Alex Townsend, Mark Logan, Gordon Hughmark, Holly Beaver and I. Mark liked "physics" as a broader expression than "nature." Alex thought naturalism was divided by the physical and the psychological and suggested methodological naturalism. He mentioned the need for evidence, and "evidence-based civics" was suggested. On further thought, artful people often bend evidence to support notions. Gordon expressed that physics is the bedrock on which everything stands. We feel that physics-based ethics is a worthy revision and look forward to future discussions.