Morality? Me? I Can't Quite See...

Another discussion list post. We are talking about morality and a concept one personal labels sacrificial love - her assertion is that it is a uniquely Christian behavior and is superior to other forms of love. This didn't feel totally accurate to me and I was trying to feel out why.

(Dr. Molla was a woman who took a health risk in order to safely complete a pregnancy. She died because of this and was later canonized by the Catholic Church for the decision.)

OK, so good example. The mother chose to risk and accept death in order to provide the child a chance at life. I don't for a moment question the validity of her decision. In her case.

Doctor Molla made a personal decision based on her own morals and the structure of the current situation. This resulted in an outcome she approved of. Now, if she had decided to preserve her own life at the expense of the baby, she would also have made a valid choice through a personal decision.

It is when we extrapolate this into a stricture for me to follow, I look up in amazement. This was her choice and it was a beautiful thing for her and her family in this situation, coming from her strongest beliefs and applied to what was happening then, at that time, to her and the others involved. It does not necessarily apply to me and mine, right now. I am in a new situation with new people and new facts, which would seem to support a new decision!

So, why do people feel the need to replace thinking with blanket rules of behavior? A person who choses to be a Christian should fully explore that path rather than learning a set of rules and then running off to dinner. If he fully understands and accepts the concept, then his decision will support this.

A person who choses to accept Islam instead, should do the same with Islam. And the Christian and the Muslim can each accept that his neighbor will make differing choices because of differing philosophies. Peace.

Yet there is something threatening about seeing someone living according to different rules! Hell, I've identified with my rules - they define me! If another set of rules works, too, then maybe mine are not as valid as I thought! Then I might not be as valid as I thought! Oh my God, what if I have to continuously question who and what I am? For life?!? What if I am never sure!

It's not the beauty of such moral lessons I don't see. It's the validity of applying them en masse. Even more, it's the fallacy of identifying with them. I am not my religion or my philosophy. I can accept change, accept that I may in time learn these are off-course. Even totally wrong. I am not my clothing, my body image, the morals I follow or the history I come from.

In this discussion, I was struck with the fact that it would be easy for me to identify with the stance that I don't identify with such things. It seems there is an endless adaptability to this tendency. Yet once I succumb, I am one more step removed from me, looking through a filter of yet another concept I've accepted to represent myself.