Open mindedness –Where’s ones moral compass needle at?

[Anatta]

Kia Ora,

It would seem we want others [cis-gender people] to accept us for who we are...Yet at times can find it hard to return the favour...

Would I be right in saying that the vast majority of us [as in trans-people] believe we are somewhat open minded especially when it comes to issues of gender and sexual orientation ?

But how open minded are we really?

Are we really open when it comes to another person's religious, spiritual beliefs that relate in a negative way to the gender identity and sexual orientation of others?

Do we respect their right to their opinion?

It's a common belief that  People who are open Minded:
•   Are more accepting of others and have fewer prejudices
•   Are more optimistic and make the most of life
•   Have less stress because they are more open to change
•   Have better problem solving skills
•   Want to learn more, therefore are more interesting

Where's your moral compass needle set? 

Just some "food for thought" [to chew on for awhile]...

BTW you don't have to participate in the little poll, it's just there to add some flavour to the topic...

Metta Zenda

[Pinkfluff]

I'm definitely open minded, but to a point. I'm not willing to entertain ideas that are totally stupid.

[Pica Pica]

"My mind aint so open, that anything can crawl right in." - song by magazine that I get in my head when people are being mumbo jumbo.

It used to be more open and the kid-romantic in me mourns the way the boundaries of my world have stiffened up a little.

However, the poll is built in such a leading way, that it is prejudiced against religious beliefs - which are not the only enemy of open-mindedness (and I'd argue, you'd have to be very open minded to believe the things most religions asked you to.)

[AbraCadabra]

The mind is like a parachute - It only works when its open

I like that,
Axelle

PS: Morals have an unpleasant flavour for me, yet ethics is for me where it's at.
PPS: Morals are always tinted by dogma --- ok, dogma is there to survive, but overcome dogmas are there to be equalised and crushed. Amen

[Pica Pica]

When I studied ethics - the difference between ethics and morals presented to us was that morals were about an individual and the individual's inner core of right/wrong, whereas ethics were about how those morals are applied in social contexts. This means that morals tended to be more general, but firm and unyielding and ethics flexible, depending on a situation.

Now, my friend Samuel Johnson would have said that the best morals are based in the revealed truths of the Bible, that the solidness of God backs up the solidness of the individual and so creates a firm moral base for ethical systems. Although I agree in principal, I don't believe in God, and so basing my morals on the morals revealed by a non-existant God would not be solid at all.

I do very strongly believe that morals should be firm and unyielding (but need not be strong in number) to be a decent, authentic and honest individual (indeed the striving to be decent, authentic and honest may all be parts of an individual's morals in themself). As to someone who claims that they have no fixed morals - I think the following exchange from Boswell's Life of Johnson sum my mind up well.

Johnson:    He wants to make himself conspicuous. He would tumble in a hogstye, as long as you looked at him and called to him to come out. But let him alone, never mind him, and he'll soon give it over.

Boswell:  He person maintained that there was no distinction between virtue and vice.

Johnson:   Why, Sir, if the fellow does not think as he speaks, he is lying; and I see not what honour he can propose to himself from having the character of a liar. But if he does really think that there is no distinction between virtue and vice, why, Sir, when he leaves our houses let us count our spoons.

- One of my morals is that ethics are relative to their situation, but to people who say they have no morals at all, I'll be counting my spoons.

[AbraCadabra]

OMG I do SO disagree! (most seldom so strongly)

Morals are taught and trained behaviour. It is "moral" people that stone the adulteress, ethics will never do that - not in my knowing. If something is unethical it could still be moral, hardly the other way round.

There also is *moralizing* yet no "ethicalizing".

If it is moral requirement to kill people, there are plenty examples, - in order to maintain dogma --- I know why I'd rather be ethical.

Food for though?
Axelle

PS: How immoral to masturbate as did Onan OT! Yet it has NOTHING to do with being unethical what ever.

[Pica Pica]

It's only a moral requirement to kill people if your morals are constructed that way...there are dumb morals as well as good ones, doesn't mean morals are themselves wrong. Morals are not the soul domain of the religious and the religious are on the whole not murdering psychopaths.

All the nitty gritty about stoning adultresses is ethics, and the ethical/legal system of that custom. If you remember the man with the morals, Jesus, was the one who stops the stoning by pointing out the hypocrisy in stoning a person when they are themselves guilty of crimes. The stoning people were following ethics, and Jesus is following morals (namely the moral to do unto others &c)...

And I'm not saying any of this as a Christian.

[Anatta]

It's only a moral requirement to kill people if your morals are constructed that way...there are dumb morals as well as good ones, doesn't mean morals are themselves wrong. Morals are not the soul domain of the religious and the religious are on the whole not murdering psychopaths.

All the nitty gritty about stoning adultresses is ethics, and the ethical/legal system of that custom. If you remember the man with the morals, Jesus, was the one who stops the stoning by pointing out the hypocrisy in stoning a person when they are themselves guilty of crimes. The stoning people were following ethics, and Jesus is following morals (namely the moral to do unto others &c)...

And I'm not saying any of this as a Christian.

Kia Ora Pica,

Closeted Christian Perhaps ? 

Metta Zenda

[Pica Pica]

Even taken as a fictional character, Jesus has some pretty solid and beneficial morals.

[Taka]

i believe in jesus, and consider myself a christian. one important moral i learned from the bible is to have an open mind and never condemn others even when the rest of society calls them sinners and wants to stone them. i'm not perfect myself, so i have no right to tell other how to live as long as they don't do anything harmful to anyone

jesus even dined with sinners, i'm sure he'd dine with transsexuals too. so i will do the same and never reject people for any other reason than a personality i can't stand. but even then i might give them a chance

and jesus never said it's ok to hurt others in his or god's name, so i will not consider those who abuse religion true christians. religion is really only empty rituals and reading without necessarily understanding. christianity is to me a faith that teaches me to love. period. no place for hate, except hating the sin itself
but these morals are seriously hard to uphold. i hate the guy who hurt my brothers, and the one who hurt my friend's daughter, and this makes me a very bad christian in my own eyes

[cynthialee]

Morals and ethics should always be situational and relavent to the moment.

What is good today, may in fact be evil tommorow.

[Taka]

ethics should definitely be changeable according to situation

but i think morals that apply only to oneself should be "firm and unyielding" (using pica's words). morals that require you to harm other people are not good morals as i see it, because according to my morals harming people is not good. and i will never yield on this point, "to never harm anyone", even when i feel compelled to go out and commit extreme atrocities upon certain people who have harmed younger members of my family. if i were to go by ethics, i'd just choose the one which suits my situation best ("an eye for an eye" is perfectly ethical in some religions), but my morals won't allow me to

[kate durcal]

Morals and ethics should always be situational and relavent to the moment.

What is good today, may in fact be evil tommorow.

Oh Cynthialee, we are so opposites. My morals and ethics do not transcend space and time they are ever constant. As far as "open mindness," as a scienetist I am open to consider anything but but metaphisical stuff.

Kate D

[~RoadToTrista~]

I think I'm pretty openminded.

[cynthialee]

I do not see how morals and ethics can be anything other than situational to truely be moral.

[Sabriel Facrin]

Hmm....I dunno about open mindedness meaning all those things...maybe I'm open minded about open mindedness filling a set criteria of results? x3

Seriously though, I think I'm pretty open-minded, of course, but I can also be fairly aggressively defensive DUE to open-mindedness: If I perceive what I'm open about as being attacked, I get concerned and go out of my way to stand up for it. D:

[Anatta]

Even taken as a fictional character, Jesus has some pretty solid and beneficial morals.

Kia Ora Pica,

A "Christian" Atheist...Quote from our friend  Wiki...
"Jesus, although not seen as divine, is still a central feature of "Christian" atheism. Most Christian atheists think of Jesus as a wise and good man, accepting his moral teachings but rejecting the idea of his divinity. Hamilton said that to the Christian atheist, Jesus is not really the foundation of faith; instead he is a "place to be, a standpoint". Christian atheists look to Jesus as an example of what a Christian should be, but they do not see him as a god!"


The whole atheist verses theist/[in this case Christian] thing is quite interesting especially for those of us who were born and live in the West where Christianity has had a foothold for [let's say] quite a while=entrenched in ones psyche so to speak...A couple of years ago I read a book by a French philosopher Andre Comte-Sponville's The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality. anyway he calls himself a "Christian" atheist, that is he tends to abide by the Christian values his family had installed in him...He would attend Christening, wedding and funerals  in church and would partake in the Christmas festive breaks like Christmas, Easter, etc, but when it comes to a belief in a god he doesn't have one ...

Metta Zenda  

[Stephe]

I would have picked #3 but I am open minded. You assume if someone has religious beliefs they are close minded. I am a very open minded person but draw the line on behavior that doesn't follow my main religious belief, "Love your neighbor as yourself" or better known as treat others as you would like to be treated. I think my position allows for almost anything that isn't -intended- to hurt someone else.

[AbraCadabra]

Just goes to show how these enquiries tend or may create endless ping-pong about meanings of words e.g. morals and ethics.
I'd bring one dictionary definition and out comes another.

The same as all these various trans***** interpretations do.

I think I'll give that a miss because it doesn't mesh with my understanding. Things like "good" and "bad" morals?! --- good Lord!
And then "flexible" ethics, really?
Like one day it's unethical to kill, then "flexing" ethics it is perfectly fine?

That's of course all being done under various "moral systems". Like burning witches, or feeding believers to the lions. None is ethical, but "good morals" at one point, and at a later point you'd just call it "bad morals"?... hey.

Religion and all its "moral requirements" and teachings also create such as the Taliban and company. Just which one you'd belong to is already too much for me to get around to.

Like my hemline being too short being considered "immoral"... tutut.
I personally stick to my knowing that it is not unethical having a shorter hemline then some more "moral" brethren.

As it will also be unethical to sleep with your neighbour's, friend's or even conkered enemies females.
Reading in the OT the latter being perfectly moral and EVEN a requirement from above (when e.g. taking over Canaan).

I think even then it may have been practical to impregnate each of the enemies females having had all the males killed – moral ok, but ethical?

Then, I guess its just words after all, yes?

Let red be carmine and blue be azure...

[Anatta]

I would have picked #3 but I am open minded. You assume if someone has religious beliefs they are close minded. I am a very open minded person but draw the line on behavior that doesn't follow my main religious belief, "Love your neighbor as yourself" or better known as treat others as you would like to be treated. I think my position allows for almost anything that isn't -intended- to hurt someone else.

Kia Ora Stephe,

This was not meant as an attack on "religious " people, I was more or less just stating a fact, that "religious upbringing" can have [but not always] an impact on the level of open mindedness in some people....

I've changed it now so has not to offend other religious people........

Thanks for pointing this out Stephe [Well I would also like to thank Pica too who also mentioned it earlier]....

Metta Zenda