Tuesday 15 September 2020

Moral laws should be as predictable and universal as the law of physics and the 7 Noahide laws

But they are not.

But they should be and could easily be! 

The Noahide laws are meant to be a minimum moral standard for gentiles. 

I have ordered them in order of obviousness:

  1. The prohibition against murder
  2. The prohibition against theft
  3. The prohibition against sexual immorality
  4. The prohibition against eating an animal while it is still alive
  5. The requirement to enforce the above laws through a court and legal system
  6. The prohibition against idolatry
  7. The prohibition against blasphemy

We already have a world government which could easily propagate the message of the 7 Noahide laws. 

The Noahide laws are easy to understand, agree to and explain.  


Dharma  has multiple meanings in Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism.

There have been numerous, conflicting attempts to translate ancient Sanskrit literature with the word dharma into German, English and French. The concept, claims Paul Horsch, has caused exceptional difficulties for modern commentators and translators. 

For example, while Grassmann's translation of Rig-veda identifies seven different meanings of dharma, Karl Friedrich Geldner in his translation of the Rig-veda employs 20 different translations for dharma, including meanings such as "law", "order", "duty", "custom", "quality", and "model", among others. 
The root of the word dharma is "dhri", which means "to support, hold, or bear". It is the thing that regulates the course of change by not participating in change, but that principle which remains constant.

What principle remains constant?  

God's laws remain constant.  

What are God's laws believed to come from God?  

They are in the Torah for Jews and the Koran for gentiles since only the Torah and the Koran are claimed to be the direct Word of God. 

the widely cited resource for definitions and explanation of Sanskrit words and concepts of Hinduism, offers numerous definitions of the word dharma, such as that which is established or firm, steadfast decree, statute, law, practice, custom, duty, right, justice, virtue, morality, ethics, religion, religious merit, good works, nature, character, quality, property. Yet, each of these definitions is incomplete, while the combination of these translations does not convey the total sense of the word. In common parlance, dharma means "right way of living" and "path of rightness".

Dharma encompasses ideas such as duty, rights, character, vocation, religion, customs and all behaviour considered appropriate, correct or morally upright.

The requirement to have a court and legal system
Let us assume most people would agree with the Noahide laws on murder, theft, sexual immorality, not eating a part of the animal while it is still alive and having a court and legal system to enforce laws.  

Let us also assume we are only talking to civilised societies who already have a court and legal system.

That is the first to be ticked in that list of seven. 
  
The prohibition against murder, theft and sexual immorality
All civilised societies would have laws forbidding murder, theft and sexual immorality because that would be the only way they could ever have become and stay civilised.  

So we can tick four.

The prohibition against animal cruelty
If there are any supposedly civilised countries with a court and legal system that need a bit of persuasion to not eat parts of an animal while it is still alive, I am sure this can be done. It is obviously unnecessarily cruel to eat an animal alive.  

So we can tick five.

The prohibition against idolatry ie the worship of anything that isn't God
China long ago accepted the presumption that there was a higher power over the Emperor of China. This idea was necessary as a check on potential abuses of power. If Xi Jinping ever became absolute dictator of China as the emperors of old, the Chinese would doubtless be invoking the Mandate of Heaven to warn him against abusing his power. Since there is always the potential of abuse of power, the theory that there is a higher power that will punish those who abuse their power would be generally accepted for practical, political and moral purposes. 

So we can tick six. 

The prohibition against blasphemy
The idea of a higher/supreme power is undeniably useful in promoting responsible government enforcing moral and just laws.To allow those with malign intentions to blaspheme against this idea of a higher/supreme power would eventually threaten public morality because public disrespect for even a hypothetical supreme being would eventually undermine the other six laws.  

That is now all seven ticked off, without even having to believe in God. 

I don't see why any scholar in  Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism would wish to reject the Noahide laws unless they were antisemites who reject them because they are Jewish or are just jealous that they didn't come up with this idea themselves and reject them because they are not part of the Hindu/Buddhist/Sikh/Jain tradition ie for chauvinistic reasons. These reasons should be treated with the contempt they deserve since these religions are not exactly known for their role in advancing the rule of law through the effective administration of an empire. 

If you are being moral and practical, you would seize on the Noahide laws with delight at how useful, moral and practicable they are, even if you dislike Jews.  

Since there are now three Christian global empires, it is the easiest thing in the world to get the countries of the world to agree to these principles without even requiring them to believe in God. 

In the Anglosphere, there is already a codification of what are loosely known as "Western values".  

British values

According to Ofsted, 'Fundamental British values' comprise:

  1. democracy
  2. the rule of law
  3. individual liberty
  4. mutual respect for and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs, and for those without faith.

Australian values

When you apply for a permanent or provisional visas

For permanent or provisional visa applications, the Australian values statement is:
I confirm that I have read, or had explained to me, information provided by the Australian Government on Australian society and values.

I understand:

Australian society values respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual, freedom of religion, commitment to the rule of law, Parliamentary democracy, equality of men and women and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need and pursuit of the public good 
Australian society values equality of opportunity for individuals, regardless of their race, religion or ethnic background 
the English language, as the national language, is an important unifying element of Australian society

New Zealand

The Respecting New Zealand Values bill, pitched at NZ First's party convention over the weekend by MP Clayton Mitchell, would require refuges and migrants to sign up and agree to respect "New Zealand values" if they are to be allowed here.

The bill garnered enough support among the party to be moved up to the party caucus to consider.
So, what are these supposed New Zealand values?

Gender equality, religious freedom, New Zealand law, a fair go, respect of sexual preferences and the legality of alcohol are some which have been mentioned by NZ First's people.


These are basically the values of the Anglosphere - also known as Western values - supposed to represent the political unity of the Anglosphere overseen by the global hegemon that is America. 

Currently, the Western empire - represented by NATO and the EU are governed by neoconservatism AKA liberal interventionism and neo-liberalism ie open borders and uncontrolled immigration also known as Transnational Progressivism.


If just one Western country adopted Secular Koranism, the rest would follow suit. It is envisaged that Trump will make America a one-party state to prevent liberals from reversing his nationalist polices. Once the horse is saddled, so to speak, the legal system of Secular Koranism will ride into Capitol Hill. The Culture War currently raging across America is is between those who identify as nationalist and those who identify as liberal. Liberalism has already been pronounced "obsolete" by Putin. 

Vladimir Putin says liberalism has ‘become obsolete’

The reason why the West should adopt a legal system guaranteeing freedom of belief with quran.com/2/256 based on the Koran is explained at https://radicalisedrabbi.blogspot.com/2020/02/noahide-ranking-of-other-four-world.html 

You could be officially atheist like China and also adopt Secular Koranism, because there is no requirement that you believe in God to adopt it. The system can be applied by legally trained people who have read the Koran and passed an examination in Koranic Knowledge.  

It is envisaged that there will be tests on Koranic Knowledge for

1) primary school children
2) secondary school students
3) law students  

That's all that is required. At no time have I ever suggested that anyone should be forcibly converted to Islam. Forced conversions are in fact peculiarly Christian, probably because the Doctrine of the Trinity is so unbelievably absurd. The Koran on the other hand guarantees freedom of belief with quran.com/2/256 and is the basis of the First Amendment. 

Once the world's nations accept the principle of submitting to the Noahide laws, it is only a matter of time before they will submit to what Muslims call sharia. 

Secular Koranism is a New School of Sharia conceived of by a legally-trained agnostic political philosopher. 

There is no requirement that they enforce these principles in exactly the same way. It is intended that they are implemented as Directives in the way EU Directives operated on EU Member States.  

A directive is a legal act of the European Union which requires member states to achieve a particular result without dictating the means of achieving that result.


Comprehension Test

1. Are our laws moral and if not why not?

2.  What does it mean to be moral?

3.  Should our laws be as predictable as the laws of physics?

4.  What laws would be considered moral?

5.  What are the objections to using the Noahide laws as a universal minimum standard of morality? 

6.  Are those who object to the Noahide laws antisemites and atheists?  

7. How should the four gentile religions be ranked?

8.  Would Islam be considered the most Noahide observant and Christianity the least of all the gentile religions?

9.  Should the Koran should be used as a universal minimum moral standard of laws globally? 

10.  Are those who object to using the Koran as a basis of their legal system - which guarantees freedom of belief - Islamophobes? 

10.  Would it be a good thing for Americans *and* non-Americans if non-Muslims in America for pragmatic reasons adopted the Koran as a basis of its one-party theocracy?

11.  Is the US Declaration correct in saying that it is "self-evident" that God created Man?

12.  Was there any other purpose in the US Declaration saying it is self-evident that God created man equal other than to reject monarchy and declare the principle of equality before the law?

13.  Is it actually unAmerican not to believe in God and not to trust in God?

14.  Are those seeking to defeat Trump by fair means or foul ie in unconstitutional and violent ways being unAmerican?

15.  If the Founding Fathers could vote in the 2020 US Presidential elections, would they vote Trump or Biden?

16.  Would America becoming a Koran-based theocracy - which would not in any way go against the US constitution - address the grievances of Biden and Trump supporters?

17.  What are the grievances of Biden and Trump supporters?

18.  Is there any moral or political reason in continuing to operate a political system offering indiscriminate universal suffrage as a way of choosing its next national leader?

19.  Is it wise for America and other Western nations to continue with a political system offering indiscriminate universal suffrage as a way of choosing its next leader when they are worried about falling behind China, particularly when it has produced so much division and disorder?

20. If you are more likely to support Trump if you believe in God and more likely to vote for Biden if you are atheist, then it is true that the distinction between religion and politics is a distinction without a difference, isn't it? 

21.  Would God approve of liberalism?

22.  Would God approve of neoliberalism and open borders?

23:  Would God approve of neoconservatism?

24.  Would God approve of globohomo? 

25.  Would God approve of government in the national interest? https://biblehub.com/psalms/86-9.htm

26.  If God protects Israel and Jews as His Chosen People, is Judaism divine ethno-nationalism?  

27.  If God divided humanity into Jews and gentiles revealing the Torah for Jews to begin His revelation and the Koran for gentiles to complete His revelation to humanity, is Islam divine civic nationalism?  

28.  Iran after it became a theocracy can defy America and its allies, when previously under the Shah it could not. If we want to be independent nation states and not be bossed around by Nancy Pelosi, hadn't we better consider something else other than divisive liberal democracy for our political system?https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/10/politics/nancy-pelosi-brexit-congress-uk-gbr-intl/index.html

at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Dr Mariche, psychologist and historian on the Caliphate and Empire

1:00  Reaching a logical conclusion 2:00  In our post-truth society, people will still make a decision not because it is the right thing to ...