In a recent discussion of abortion, I was reminded by a philosophical ally that there are those who have faith AND believe in human rights for women. It got me thinking about the difference, not really in the definition of faith, but how its applied. It seems to me there are two ways that faith exists.
For some people their faith is a product of their morality and, by learning the truth, they come to know god. For others, their morality is a product of faith and truth is a pre-existing shape to which reality must be molded. No doubt, some people possess such a rigid idea of morality and faith that no new information can be allowed to challenge it. Others are happy to see their morality and faith evolve with the addition of new facts.
So, my question is, does anyone believe that what their god prefers can be different than what makes sense for human, civil society? Or, do you believe that what is right for humans MUST naturally be consistent with morality and adjust your faith accordingly.
Would you describe your faith as rigid or flexible and how does that make it work better for you?
How do you reconcile your faith when what your faith demands is inconsistent with what you or others need to be happy?
Just curious...