>So why compassion? Why not hate?
>This person hurt you.

This person is/was a victim...he, too, was hurting for a loooong time. Only humans are capable of hate because they take fear to the next level and it leads to suffering. Only humans are capable of taking nature's basic needs and complicating them to suit their needs. My point was that from the beginning children are more natural than conditioned by man-made laws (morals)...much like all of the animal kingdom.

>But why compassion, forgiveness, etc?
>Why do we have morality?

I've been watching Animal Planet and seeing how dogs and cats respond to "human kindness" after being abused. They forgive and it's not because they don't know any better. Most of the time these animals know when they are being helped or harmed, when somone's intentions are to love, not hurt them.

>Have you read any
>other of the other posts except your own?
>I'm just curious.

I don't read my posts unless someone responds to them. I read and write what comes to mind based on my observations.

>So what is natural law? What is the law of human nature?
>Is it something we've made up. Or is it the NATURAL?

It's not human nature but NATURE that follow certain rules, so to speak. For example, the law of gravity. It existed before Newton and animals followed it. Things existed as part of a universal flow. Panthers didn't try to fly...birds did not suddenly launch into space. These animals live in harmony with nature's laws...but not humans. We think the world was made just for us, for us to conquer and we think we can break these laws.

>Exactly!
>So these laws of nature... where do they come from?
>You seem to have identified just fine that there are basic
>principles that are part of us that we did not INVENT.
>Correct?

Who but humans ask, "Where does nature's laws come from?" Next comes, "How can we master them, change them to suit our needs?" The laws of gravity, energy, etc. comes from where? Why do humans feel the need to master these laws and use them to suit their own needs...at the expense of the planet?

>But could "don't murder people" very well have been
>different or opposite?
>Or is there a "morality" here that is derived from our
>natural/universal law?

All animals kill but a leopard kills a zebra...but just one zebra that she eats and shares with her family. She doesn't kill the entire herd or keep others from eating the herd. In turn, the zebras eat the grasses but they don't keep gazelles from eating those same grasses. It's a cycle and no animal (except) humans breaks these laws that keep things on an even keel. This leopard is living, not in chaos but in an ordered world, yet, she does not have morals.

>Therefore you
>are not free, or able to lump Christianity in with whatever
>religion you are speaking of that requires men to go to
>"other men" in order to "get to God". Christianity
>teaches a personal and loving God whom is available to all.

Catholicism is Christianity. It's one of the oldest and most powerful religions in the world. Other Christian religions designate pastors, priests and somehow more connected to God than the masses. For several years, I thought I needed to do A and B and rely on "men of God" to have a personal relationship. That was because the book of law said so.

A lot of things we now take for granted, that have caused much suffering, were mandated by Christians and lots of other people. Christians make war based on their own laws. Manifest Destiny was supported by Christians to spread the "word of God", while people were enslaved, land was taken away, etc. This is not just about Christians but based on the idea that morals exist other than to control the world.