Interesting that many read, and that no one so far responds. I reject the myth of human progress to better good as much as I do original sin as an explanation for evil. War is not something likely to end nor is violence. Can you deal with the concern? Richard

[QUOTE=rbchaddy2000;614210]I profoundly reject all forms of the doctrines of the atonement and original sin. Nonetheless, I feel that many liberals fail to appreciate the seriousness of human evil. The Third Humanist Manifesto took the downside of humanity much more seriously. Liberal/Progressive Christian thought is taking human evil more seriously. The eight principles of the UUA fall short in my opinion of addresing the darkside of humanity. I recall "The Heart of Darkness" by Joseph Conrad. The overwhelming majority of Christian stands on evil reference the need for atonement and a savior namely Christ. How do we relevantly respond as liberals and/or humanists to the Christian "Catch 22" ? Should we speak more strongly in full realization of our humanity that we as humans share a temendous propensity for violence with our African chimpanzee and bonobo relatives that form a clade with us? The Holocaust, American chattel slavery, and war speak volumes about our problems. The issue neeeds to be confronted frankly with an appropriate response to the Christian alternative. Jewish ethical and moral seriousness shows one alternative. Thoughts? Richard[/QUOTE]

I see evil as a real event and, of course, a serious problem.  However, needless to say I don't believe we need any "savior" and I think the Christian argument that we do is ludicrous in the extreme.  Also, I doubt anyone but the most rabid fundamentalist believes in a literal Devil anymore, so there goes that aspect of it.

As what might be called a "theistic humanist" at the moment, I believe evil comes about when humans deliberately and knowingly use their free will to make choices that they know are hurtful, violent, and lead to suffering.  For example, someone who commits a murder knowing that he is going to take a human life, that this act will lead to suffering, but doesn't care could be said to have done something evil.  Of course, there are so many shades of grey here.  Slavery, for example, was evil as an institution and yet I don't think we can call many of the slave-owners evil; they had always been told that Blacks were inferior, inhuman, etc and had no way of knowing differently.  While they were wrong, badly wrong, in lack of better knowledge I don't think they were "evil" so to speak.

I agree that evil is a huge, huge problem and one that is inadvertently or deliberately overlooked by UUs and liberals in general.   Because it doesn't fit into our view of how the world "should" be, we ignore it.  Oh, sure, we pay lip service to the idea that we should stamp out violence, end hunger, etc but don't do enough about it.  I think we are especially amiss when we don't  talk about the religious sources of evil.  In Islamic countries, for example, women and gays are subjected to the most inhuman and barbaric treatment imaginable under Muslim law, but I think we look the other way sometimes because to take a stand on it would mean we'd have to admit to ourselves that there is something very wrong with that religion.  Of course, this goes against our PC charade that all beliefs and cultures are good and equal. To a much lesser extent, Fundamentalist Christianity is still a huge problem in the US, with a very evil agenda.....total domination and suppression of all other faiths and practices.  Since it's politically correct not to like them, this issue DOES get talked about, but I don't think the threat is taken seriously enough.

I think we can talk about evil without having to address at all any kind of supernatural meanings.  Atonement, etc by a god are not needed.  We suffer BY and from out sins, not for them. It's clear that evil actions hurt not only the individual (whoever is on the receiving end, as well as the doer, who often sinks lower and lower into violence and hate) but society as a whole.  It's only when we address the root cause of many world problems (bad people doing bad things, and WHY they do them) that I think any real progress will be made.

new-earth: We all have our right to an opinion. I was speaking of war in general in the first place. Your comment is just as narrow as that of a fundamentalist. Republicans and  neo-conservatives should have just as much say in the UUA as anyone else. Read the eight principles to Iran who is shooting trial missiles. Yes, the principles have much to recommend them, but they possess a naivette on the human propensity to do evil. I am glad that you think you are so right like TV evangelists.  By the way, the AUC and The Unitarian Community who are more narrowly classical unitarian do seem to respect other political views. There were weapons of mass destruction in 2003 and I do have some proof. Richard

[QUOTE=new_earth;615986]Why are you hiding your WMD proof from the rest of the world? :O  j/k

Seriously though, I think the mentality of 'get them before they get us' contributes to evil, when the result is murder. It's like if I knew all these people who have guns, and even though they never directly threatened me or my family, I go out and buy one myself, and kill them all so they don't kill me first. I'm not trying attack your political views, but I am saying the fear of evil can contribute to evil.[/QUOTE] new_earth: Thanks for this thoughtful reply. I particularly was impressed with the words that I used in a title here. I will make good on my statement of WMD Take care. Richard

If you want to discuss the Iraq War specifically, please start a new thread in the debate forum.

I think that a discussion of evil in a more general sense and whether or not UU's acknowledge and deal with it effectively is better done here.

What about personal "evil"? I agree with Chris that UU's seem to ignore the fact that we are just as likely as most humans to treat each other nastily. Unlike other religions that have at least some recognition of human failure to behave as well as we know we ought to at times and that offer a means of atoning for such failures, UU's pretty much seem to focus upon only the "feel good" aspects of humanity unless we can turn the "not so goods" into a social justice cause and establish a committee to deal with it.

Sometimes, I'm not so sure the Transcendentalists were a good influence in this regard.