6.20.2005

Moral Obligation

A very interesting question was raised the other day: Would our sense of moral obligation lessen and/or eventually diminish if religion became nonexistent? I know people always say there are three things you should avoid in conversation: sex, religion, and politics. Well, all that’s going out the window here. After all, that’s why I have a blog, to raise issues and state the things that are on my mind, right? Right.

That said, let’s dig into the issue of moral obligation and its relation to religion. I went to Catholic grammar and high schools. I have a Catholic mother and a Pentecostal father who is also a reverend. Having studied these two religions in depth, having friends of varied denominations who have taught me about their beliefs and the dogmas of their religions, as well as researching different schools of philosophy/thought, I have pondered this matter a good deal and have come to one conclusion: I do not believe moral obligation stems from religion. To be more precise, I think that structured religion(s) uses moral obligations in order to create religious laws; morality (as we define it) spawned religious beliefs. Religious institutions were founded on man’s ideas since man’s first thought.

To delve a little further, science has been disproving religion’s fanciful theories for centuries with more logical ones. But, with every new theory, moral obligation has not changed and will not if cared for, not necessarily by a religious institution, but by a family unit and healthy environment. One’s upbringing determines how moral a person is, and one does not have to be raised with religion as the only example of morality or source for instilling moral responsibility. Morality and religion are two separate entities that have been unnecessarily linked. And I don’t think I would be remiss in saying that people hesitate in accepting this way of thought because most structured religions have engrained their superstitions, along with a false sense of security, into their parishioners.

Although it seems that things have become more chaotic, I don't think morality has diminished over time, I think we are more exposed to its presence through all of the terrible images that have been glamorized in the media. Morality is part of being human; conversely, so is immorality. And as we change with the times, so do our standards and ways in which we live. Even religious leaders change their laws to reflect the times. Because moral and metaphysical laws have all been created by man, we shouldn’t be surprised when conflicts arise and amendments are made.

I think the Golden Rule is effective enough in teaching people to take moral responsibility seriously. It’s more logical, practical, and concrete than instilling the fear of God and Hell to make a person “good.” One of my many problems with religion is that moral lessons (and everything else) are instilled with fear and punishment, rather than logic. “You can’t do this, or else all hell and damnation will be upon you!” I’d rather have no reason at all than a bogus one to make me want to be a morally good person. We should all lead ethical lives because there’s no need in making life even harder to deal with. You don’t need religion to teach you not to kill, steal, respect your parents, etc. It should be common sense when applying the Golden Rule; it’s gold for a reason. I’d rather live my life in a way that, if I found out there really is hell and damnation to pay for my transgressions, I’d have nothing to worry about anyway.

6.15.2005

Almost French

I get totally infatuated with almost all things French. It's been this way since my last visit to Paris over a year ago. I'm sure it doesn't help that I went to a school of French origin for nine years and that many things have stuck with me into adulthood. I have even entertained dropping everything and moving there to start a whole new life, there or Italy. I would take on a lover, have beautiful clothes, eat all the sumptuous foods, drink all the marvelous wines, all while maintaining an envious figure. I would be so chic and fabulous and speak fluent French with a perfect Parisian accent, because I would, after all, be living in the heart of the city.

After reading Sarah Turnbull's Almost French, her chronicle of moving to France on a whim to be with a French man and becoming a free lance writer inspired me to wonder what life would be like if I did move to France temporarily and then came back to the life I am currently living.It might not be such a good thing.

Dual Citizenship

She left for Paris to discover a new world.
When she got there, exhilarating adventures unfurled.
She danced in the glow of the Eiffel Tower
And absorbed from it its romantic power.
Every night she feasted on rare delights;
So filled with content, her eyes shone bright
Like the brilliantly colored glass in a local parfumerie.
She took in life’s entire splendor via Parisian majesty.
Never had she thought it possible to feel like this.
When she returned home, she knew she would miss
Her lover, the food, shopping, and snobbish accents;
Joie de vivre, great wine and cramped provincial apartments.
At home, she was now to be faced with a great challenge:
Not to compare her reacquired life with the French mélange
Of passions that were so easily expressed.
If not careful, her life would be a mess,
Not fitting in anymore with her friends
Because she had left so many loose ends
Untied across the great Atlantic.
The more she thought of it, she grew frantic.
Her ribs ached for the life she left there,
But still longed for the place where
Most of her beloved memories lived and breathed.
But could she keep these fresher memoirs sheathed,
So they would not cut her heart unexpectedly at every turn?
She loathed the always present acidic burn.

Where is home now?


©2005 Vicky Therese Davis

I guess I would just have to stay there. Pity, pity!

6.12.2005

Worthless Marriage

“I won’t do what I’ve seen so many girls do. I won’t waste all my love, all my energy, all my intellect…on some useless man who devotes himself to golf or to selling bonds in the City. When I marry, it will be to someone who’ll really contribute. I mean to humanity, to a better world. Is that such an awful ambition? I don’t come to places like this in search of famous men…I come in search of distinguished ones… But I won’t accept it’s my fate to waste my life on some pleasant, polite, morally worthless man.”


So says Sarah Hemmings, the fiery female lead in Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel, When We Were Orphans. I’m sure this is a question among many unmarried and strong-minded females. My answer is no, it is not such an “awful ambition.”
I must say she is not far off; rather it is quite admirable, especially when compared to the ubiquitous image of gold-digging vultures that seems to prevail, lingering in the thoughts of successful unmarried men who have grown wary of “picking the wrong one.”

Well, I’m leery, too. I’ve got a lot to offer and don’t want it wasted on a morally worthless man. None of us should have to accept it’s our fate to squander ourselves on men who are “pleasant, polite, and morally worthless.” The world is filled to the brim with hollow marriages already. Men aren’t the only ones struggling with the vulture factor, either. Successful women have a lot to lose as well, especially now that we are taking more dominant roles in the workplace and at home, and we need to be more cautious (thank lawyers for pre-nups!). Lady Astor is credited for saying, “I married beneath me – all women do.” Why must that be? Of course, I understand her sarcasm here, but still, am I being too idealistic here in thinking it is possible to find someone of equal ambition? Was Sarah Hemmings also? If she was when she made her above declaration, then I echo her enthusiastically. There is nothing wrong with trying to find, or holding out for someone that wishes to better the world in which he/she was born. We should all want to contribute in some manner anyway. A couple joined with that common goal, along with of course, love and all the other romantic sentiments, will be all the stronger and happier when they can genuinely support each other’s aims.

Wanting an ambitious, distinguished partner is completely different than wanting a rich and/or famous one; the latter is just plain gold-digging. It just so happens that sometimes, ambitious and distinguished are linked to rich. We just need to be able to discern for ourselves which of these adjectives is the more attractive one for us, and that will tell us about our true natures.

I can go on debating this topic a lot more, but choose not to get into the nitty-gritty details on a blog. Her statement just seemed an interesting one and I felt like briefly addressing it with people and give them something to think about as well when out there searching. On my part, however, I will stand firm and hold out for the one who will attempt to better the world with me, so that in the meantime, we can enrich each other. But, that’s just me!

6.10.2005

Step into Liquid

Since the rain has no thoughts of letting up anytime soon (it is hurricane season afterall), I have grown sick of all the gloomy faces and clouds and frefuse to write anymore about the horrible weather. Instead, let us ride the choppy waves of the ocean together in my poem, "Step into Liquid."

I watch the ocean’s waves
Gently breaking on the shore.
The water rolls so smoothly
That I wish my body could transform
Into this cleansing liquid that
Hypnotizes my mind and causes
Me to dream of faraway places
Anywhere but here
And makes me wish the waves that
Pull the sand with its deceptive undertow
Will drag me out into the depths where
I can finally be one with the elements,
Feeling the earth’s pulse with every ebb and flow.


I look at the white caps and silently
Wish I could dissolve like the tiny bubbles;
Vaporize into the air and be invisible,
Disappear into the ether so my intentions seem undetectable.
No, I recant that dream; better to be water,
Covering the earth en masse with my unpredictability.
I could rise up when angry and change color to reflect my moods.
Serene at one moment and raging the next; the facets of my personality
All a part of Nature’s balance.

In retrospect, never mind; being me is best.
I have the ability to be all things now,
In human form, the way it was intended.
Using the written word, I can become anything I so desire.
Even in my mind, I am all things, because all things are in me.
The Author of Nature has given me the ability—
Nay, the responsibility,
To make manifest my goals.
This is my life’s work, and so I willingly
Step into it, embracing the challenge that is
Me.

©2005 Vicky Therese Davis

6.08.2005

I am an Anarchist.

While browzing through one of my many poetry sites, I came across this interesting speech about the true definition of anarchy. Everything in it was so well stated, I don't quite know what else to add, only: Oh how the media distorts the true meanings of things! After reading the Anarchist Goldman's speech, I must say, I guess I am an anarchist, too.

An Anarchist Looks At Life: Speech Before the Foyle's Twenty-Ninth Literary Luncheon
by Emma Goldman, Anarchist

March 1, 1933

Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, the subject this noon is, "An Anarchist Looks at Life." I cannot speak for all my fellow anarchists, but for myself I wish to say that I have been so furiously busy living my life that I had not a moment left to look at it. I am aware that a period comes to everybody when we are obliged, perforce, to sit back and look at life. That period is a wise old age, but never having grown wise I do not expect to ever reach that point. Most people who look at life never live it. What they see is not life but a mere shadow of it. Have they not been taught that life is a curse visited upon them by a bungling God who has made man in his own image? Therefore most people look at life and upon life as a sort of stepping-stone to a heaven in the hereafter. They dare not live life, or get the living spirit out of life as it presents itself to them. It means a risk; it means the giving up their little material achievements. It means going against "public opinion" and the laws and rules of one's country. There are few people who have the daring and the courage to give up what they hug at their hearts. They fear that their possible gain will not be the equivalent for what they give up. As for myself, I can say that I was like Topsy. I was not born and raised--I "grewed." I grew with life, life in all its aspects, in its heights and in its depths. The price to pay was high, of course, but if I had to pay it all over again, I should gladly do it, for unless you are willing to pay the price, unless you are willing to plunge into the very depths, you will never be able to remount to the heights of life.

Naturally, life presents itself in different forms to different ages. Between the age of eight and twelve I dreamed of becoming a Judith. I longed to avenge the sufferings of my people, the Jews, to cut off the head of their Holofernos. When I was fourteen I wanted to study medicine, so as to be able to help my fellow-beings. When I was fifteen I suffered from unrequited love, and I wanted to commit suicide in a romantic way by drinking a lot of vinegar. I thought that would make me look ethereal and interesting, very pale and poetic when in my grave, but at sixteen I decided on a more exalted death. I wanted to dance myself to death.

Then came America, America with its huge factories, the pedaling of a machine for ten hours a day at two dollars fifty a week. It was followed by the greatest event in my life, which made me what I am. It was the tragedy of Chicago, in 1887, when five of the noblest men were judicially murdered by the State of Illinois. They were the famous anarchists of America--Albert Parsons, Spies, Fischer, Engels and Lingg who were legally assassinated on the 11th of November, 1887. Brave young Lingg cheated his executioners, preferring to die by his own hand, while three other comrades of the executed--Neebe, Fielden and Schwab--were doomed to prison. The death of those Chicago martyrs was my spiritual birth: their ideal became the motive of my entire life.

I realise that most of you have but a very inadequate, very strange and usually false conception of Anarchism. I do not blame you. You get your information from the daily press. Yet that is the very last place on earth to seek for truth in any state of form. Anarchism, to the great teachers and leaders in the spiritual aspect of life, was not a dogma, not a thing that drains the blood from the heart and makes people zealots, dictators or impossible bores. Anarchism is a releasing and liberating force because it teaches people to rely on their own possibilities, teaches them faith in liberty, and inspires men and women to strive for a state of social life where every one shall be free and secure. There is neither freedom nor security in the world today: whether one be rich or poor, whether his station high or low, no one is secure as long as there is a single slave in the world. No one is safe or secure as long as he must submit to the orders, whim or will of another who has the power to punish him, to send him to prison or to take his life, to dictate the terms of his existence, even from the cradle to the grave.

It is not only because of love of one's fellow-men--it is for their own sake that people must learn to understand the meaning and significance of Anarchism, and it will not be long before they will appreciate the great importance and the beauty of its philosophy.

Anarchism repudiates any attempt of a group of men or of any individual to arrange life for others. Anarchism rests on faith in humanity and its potentialities, while all other social philosophies have no faith in humanity whatever. The other philosophies insist that man cannot govern himself and that he must be ruled over. Nowadays most people believe that the stronger the Government the greater the success of society will be. It is the old belief in the rod. The more used on the child the finer will it be when grown to manhood or womanhood. We have emancipated ourselves from that stupidity. We have come to understand that education does not mean knocking in, does not mean crippling, warping and dwarfing the young growth. We have learned that freedom in the development of the child secures better results, both so far as the child and society are concerned.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is Anarchism. The greater the freedom and the opportunities for every unit in society, the finer will be the individual and the better for society; and the more creative and constructive the life of the collectivity. That, in brief, has been the ideal to which I have devoted my life.

Anarchism is not a cut-and-dried theory. It is a vital spirit embracing all of life. Therefore I do not address myself only to some particular elements in society: I do not address myself only to the workers. I address myself to the upper classes as well, for indeed they need enlightenment even more than the workers. Life itself teaches the masses, and it is a strict, effective teacher. Unfortunately life does not teach those who consider themselves the socially select, the better educated, the superior. I have always held that every form of information and instruction that helps to widen the mental horizon of men and women is most useful and should be employed. For in the last analysis, the grand adventure--which is liberty, the true inspiration of all idealists, poets and artists--is the only human adventure worth striving and living for.

I do not know how many of you have read Gorki's marvellous prose-poem called "The Snake and the Falcon." The snake cannot understand the falcon. "Why don't you rest here in the dark, in the good slimy moisture?" the snake demands. "Why soar to the heavens? Don't you know the dangers lurking there, the stress and storm awaiting you there, and the hunter's gun which will bring you down and destroy your life?" But the falcon paid no heed. It spread its wings and soared through space, its triumphant song resounding through the heavens. One day the falcon was brought down, blood streaming from its heart, and the snake said: "You fool, I warned you, I told you to stay where I am, in the dark, in the good warm moisture, where no one could find you and harm you." But with its last breath the falcon replied: "I have soared through space, I have scaled dazzling heights, I have beheld the light, I have lived, I have lived!"
(personal side note: I must find a copy of this poem!)

Who would like to join me?

6.04.2005

Enough already!

I know that hurricane season has started, but enough of the gloom already! I went for what I thought would be a pleasant walk and regretted it the minute I stepped out of the air conditioning. It felt like I was walking into soup, it was so humid. A film immediately spread across my face and my clothes began sticking to me in the most uncomfortable way. I hadn't even made it down the driveway yet!

Since I was already out, I figured I might as well make the most of my venture, until I caught my reflection in a store window. My once sleek ponytail had turned into a wanna-be afro puff! I had some loose strands hanging nicely from the elastic, but the rest looked like a cross between a mangled piece of brillo and Diana Ross on a bad hair day. That, coupled with my Crisco face made me turn around and head straight back home where I will undoubtedly stay until I absolutely must come out. Talk about traumatic! (Now I have to go and get another piercing...lol)

A Tangled Mess

Try as I might, it just won’t listen.
I tug and pull, twist and tear,
But it refuses to give in.
So I try to ease the tension by
Smoothing it, patting it, stroking it lovingly.
Nothing works; the tangles won’t break free.
I wine and dine it, give it expensive food,
Take it out on the town; nothing works.
It’s costing me a fortune and I’m in a bad mood.
We’re to the point that we have to see experts.
I’m giving in, throwing in the towel; it’s a wrap.
I’ll pull it back, cover it with a cap.
My arms hurt, my head aches and now I’m late
All because of this frizzy hair that won’t cooperate!

© 2005 by Vicky T. Davis

Until next time, folks!