"I Flee and Moan, Therefore I am . . ."

Like Nixon, not Woodward

A short blog of no real consequence, a rebound as it were.

Blogger: (noun) one who flees to his personal writing space and moans to the best of his ability.

Moan: (verb) to point out the flaws in others.

Information is where you find it.

• FOI is a legal initiative to drag information reluctantly from government, for government has a natural drive toward secrecy. It is best done through legislation that mandates accessibility to all but the most sensitive of government information.

• Spying is the risky business of stealing information from another nation to help defend one's own nation. It is generally illegal and is carried out secretly for purposes deemed important and righteous. Spies are often executed.

• Investigative journalism starts with an issue and probes sometimes hidden or undiscovered information to shed light on the issue. It is journalism with a purpose deeper than reporting on everyday events. Investigative journalism will sometimes rely on unrevealed sources that have access to secret information. The righteous justification is found in revealing who did what to whom, when, where, why and how. What is often criminal. 

• Whistle-blowing is the non-journalistic cousin of investigative journalism.

• Wikileaks is a political effort aimed at undermining the integrity of powerful states using methods that are illegal, such as theft of information. It is akin to spying except it is not in defense of any nation, but is for the destruction of nations. Wikileaks would argue that it furthers the betterment of mankind, but one wonders why undertakings are done with disregard toward laws. Laws are the rules by which we pursue the betterment of mankind. 

Wikileaks is Nixon, doing illegal acts for political purposes. Investigative journalism is Woodward, doing discovery on illegal acts.

We should be clear on this.

Scurrilous scumbag: (adjective fronting a noun) Julian Assange

The Hierarchy of Loyalties and Ethics II

By Edgar Lores

Law is born from despair of human nature. - Jose Ortega y Gasset

Part 2 - The New Paradigm

The Model as a Representation of the Real World

In Part 1, we described the beginnings of the Hierarchy of Loyalty, its composition and some of its characteristics.

The observation made in Part 1 of the progression from selfishness to selflessness hints at the possibility for using the model as a tool in ethics.  It would also suggest that ethical conduct is inversely related to the distance of a construct from Self.

• The most unethical man is one who only thinks of himself.  Example: senators.
• The man with the highest morality is one who sacrifices his life for the benefit of others.  Examples: parents, firemen, Jesus.

Before we go further, let me perform a sleight-of-hand and re-enumerate the Hierarchy with a slight modification:

1. Gods

2. Worlds

3. Countries

4. Churches

5. Communities

6. Families

7. Selves

Voila, did you see that?  What have I done?  I have pluralized the constructs.  And simply by doing so, I have made the model a real representation of the world.  There are indeed many gods, many worlds, many countries, many churches, many communities, many families and many selves. Physically we have only one world until we colonize the moon and Mars.

This sleight-of-hand brings us smack bang into the era of postmodernism, an era just passed at the end of the last century.  Put simply, postmodernism is the view that there is not one single truth but many truths, and that our version of reality is our personal interpretation of what is out there.  It rejects the existence of ultimate truth and goes to the extent of positing that all versions of personal truth are in error.

In a word, postmodernism destroys the view, held since the time of Aristotle, that truth is monolithic, that it is absolute and universal.  Many have not heard at all about the news of postmodernism and are still locked into the paradigm of absolutism, of One Truth and One God.

The good news about postmodernism is that it recognizes plurality which is undeniable.  Even the Church acknowledges the plurality of religions in terms of existence, although it may not accept their validity in terms of doctrinal substance.  The bad news is that it has led, or is leading, us into moral relativism. Or the dictatorship of relativism, as Pope Benedict XVI calls it.

Since 1990, we have been in the era of post-postmodernism.  These two eras have witnessed explosive technological growth.  Man has become enthralled and distracted by the latest gadgetry, while his moral universe seemingly collapses.  These are the best and the worst of times.  But perhaps the times are best described by the poet Yeats in "The Second Coming".  In the first stanza, he says, "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; / Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world."  And he concludes with, "The best lack all conviction, while the worst / Are full of passionate intensity".  How true!  Especially if you watch the unseemly dummy spits in the Senate.

So as the "centre cannot hold", integration is sorely needed.  In the face of plurality, religion may no longer provide this integration because no religion is truly catholic.  That is catholic with a small "c" meaning universal.  This is not to say that religion should be abandoned.  Religion is necessary to administer to the spiritual needs of those in need, to usher us into the mysteries of birth and death, to comfort the poor and the dispossessed, and perhaps to entertain us with its colorful festivals. More seriously, religions can continue to be truly relevant if they can come together and contribute to the development and implantation of a universally accepted secular code of ethics, a non-digital tablet of commandments for all times, all nations and all men.    

In my essay, "The Seven Commandments of Secular Ethics", which was published in this blog, I argued that an agreement on absolute secular rules of conduct can be, and must be, arrived at.  I presented seven commandments that in my view transcend postmodernism.  I said, "As envisioned, the commandments are absolute but must be applied relatively".

The question before us then is: Can the Hierarchy of Loyalties be used to arrive at an objective standard that may be applied to resolve ethical conflicts?

To answer this question, I consider two approaches, a formal one and an informal one.  The formal approach sees the Hierarchy as structure, as a strata of rules.  The informal approach sees the Hierarchy as process, as the interaction of constructs between and among themselves.

Before we examine these approaches, let me state three caveats: 

• With respect to the Hierarchy and this essay, the viewpoint is mainly from the Self as it interacts with other constructs.

• Independent of Self, there are vast interactions between, among and within the other constructs.  These interactions are governed by existing protocols that, it must be admitted, require greater and constant refinement.

• The ideas presented here are in embryonic form.  They give an overview of a schema that hopefully will acquire refinement when finalized in the paper.  I am presenting the dots but not all of the connections.

The Formal Approach - Strata of Rules

The formal approach takes the structure of the Hierarchy and links the constructs to associated rules.  This is shown in the table below.  Surprisingly or not so surprisingly, the sequence of the attached rules is indicative of their ethical primacy.

CONSTRUCT	PRIO RITY	ASSOCIATED RULES	CODIFICATIONS OR EXAMPLES OF
God	1	Rule of Conscience	Secular Commandments
World	2	Rule of International Law	o    Universal Declaration of Human Rights o    Law of the Sea
Country	3 – 4	Rule of the Law of the Land	o    Constitution o    Body of Law
Community	3 – 4	Rule of the Tribe	o    Subsumed under Country
Church	5	Rule of Religion	o    Ten Commandments o    Shariah o    Magisterium
Family	6	Rule of Family Law	o    Care of Children o    Divorce/Separation
Self	7	Rule of Personal Maintenance	o    Personal Hygiene o    Dietary Rules

At first glance, people will object right off the bat and say, "Hey, Ed, you are confusing Law with Ethics".  My reply would be that Law is essentially codified Ethics.  Not all Law is ethical, and indeed there are some that are distinctly unethical.  Also, a second glance will reveal that not all ethical rules have been codified into law.  Some are transmitted through tradition, and some, if not the majority, are uncodified and unwritten.  In the absence of ethical rules at all levels, bear with me and let us assume that these rules are the formal constituents of ethics.

• One, the Rule of Conscience is the primary ethical rule.  This is our small inner voice and for the most part it is not codified.  The primacy of conscience is implicitly recognized in the right of citizens to overthrow a repressive government, and in the right of married couples to use methods of contraception in spite of objections from a religious quarter. Thus it transcends the Law of the Land and the Rule of Religion.

• Pope Benedict XVI may pose the objection that this, in fact, enthrones the dictatorship of relativism.  My answer would be that the Church itself bases its moral code on Natural Law.  I would argue that the Rule of Conscience is the embodiment of Natural Law.  It is not codified, yet people instinctively recognize its primacy.

• But what if a man's conscience misinterprets Natural Law?  This is the heart of the matter, and this is where the informal approach to the Hierarchy steps in as I will explain later.

• The Rule of Conscience is based on the premise that the most important construct in the Hierarchy is the least of the constructs, the Self, the individual human being.  I say "least" because the systems and institutions built around the other constructs - such as governments and religions - tend to forget their origins and the reason for their being. They shift their loyalty away from man and toward the isms and dogmas that are supposed to serve him. They become entrapped in loyalty to themselves, entangled in the power passed on or even surrendered to them by their constituencies.

• The reason for their being is primarily the development, the flowering of the Self.  Without the Self, there is no other.  Without the consciousness of the Self, there can be no apprehension of other constructs.  The raison d'etre for the State is to serve its citizens. The raison d'etre for the church is, not to serve God (Shock! Horror! Damnation!), but to serve its flock - in order that they may live life in conscious celebration of all that is divine and perhaps the not so divine.  To paraphrase Lincoln, all hierarchical constructs are ultimately of the Self, for the Self, and by the Self.

• "Hey, Ed!" you interject, "Will not this centricity of the ego turn the Self into a monster?"  Not at all.  Because the individual Self must always be constrained by the path of ethics which is a "consideration of others".

• Two, the Rule of International Law. Most people do not see the relevance of International Law in their lives.  True, International Law is primarily concerned with the interaction between and among Countries.  But in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) we find the codification of human rights and freedoms which forms the heart of the ethical norms the State must observe with respect to its citizens.

• The Rule of International Law is not entirely codified and is not yet recognized by all nation-states. The dream of a World Government, as first embodied in the League of Nations and then in the United Nations, is far from reality and far from realization.  It will take centuries before we reach that dream.  Nation-states continue to misbehave with respect to their citizens and with respect to each other, and the current mechanisms of controls are weak.

• Three, the country's Law of the Land which is codified in the Constitution and the body of statutory law and common law.  Currently the Law of the Land may be secular or it may be religious.  In a theocracy, the Law of Religion coincides with the Law of the Land.  In a secular state, under the doctrine of the separation of Church and State, the Law of the Land prevails over religious doctrine.  Rightfully, there are certain religious commandments embedded in the Law of the Land, but wrongfully there are also remnants of religious influences in it, such as Article 133 of the Revised Penal Code and that phrase "unborn from conception" in our Constitution.

• The Hierarchy assumes the superiority of a secular state over a sectarian one, and a democracy over a totalitarian one.  The reasons are obvious.  A secular state recognizes plurality while a sectarian state does not.  A democratic state recognizes the sovereignty of the Selves within it while a totalitarian one does not. A secular state may be democratic but a theocracy can never be democratic.

• Four, the Law of the Tribe has been subsumed under the Law of the Land.  To a large extent, tribal identities - whether based on blood, dialect or religion - have been absorbed into national identities.   However, tribal identities continue to play a large role in national life, for example, the Muslims and the indigenous tribes in the Philippines.  The Law of the Tribe is largely uncodified but remains extant in traditions that are passed down through generations.

• Five, the Rule of Religion.  Different religions have different rules and observances.  In the Abrahamic religions, the religious law is centrally embodied in the Ten Commandments, although versions differ.  But in all religions, there are canons, mostly restrictions that range from the definition of and the penalties for sin to diet, body hygiene and articles of clothing.

• The phrase the "pathology of religion" has been overused, and there are different definitions of it, but I suggest it may consist in the twin claim that the Rule of Religion is the Rule of Conscience and that it should be the Law of the Land.

• Six, the Rule of Family Law is a subset of the Law of the Land.  In the Philippines, we have anomalies of loyalty (a) wherein elected politicians are allowed to show greater loyalty to the construct of Family over the construct of Country, and (b) wherein the construct of Country does not provide for the breakdown of trust between husband and wife within the construct of Family because of opposition by the construct of Church.

• Seven and finally, the Rule of Personal Maintenance.  Important as they may be, we will not discuss the combing of hair, the brushing of teeth and the cutting of toenails.

Finally, on a side note, there are many other rules and codes of conduct.  Companies, professions and social clubs all have their own codes, and I am aware and greatly amused by the Bro Code.  I wish it had been codified in my youth.

In Part 3, we will take look at the informal approach.

Why Y'all Uncomfortable with Americans?

Shape shifters and borgs.

Shape-shifters are Star Trek aliens who possess the magnificent ability to change composition and morph into different shapes and looks and beings. A lizard-man one day, a human the next.

The borg is a big cubic alien world/structure that unites the brains of thousands of humanoids in one machine-like creature that is relentlessly rational and ruthless. From many, one.

Shape shifter

America is one part shape-shifter and one part borg.

I have no idea what the Philippines is, but it is not a shape shifter, and I don't think it is a borg. It may be an asteroid, a big chunk of rock that does not change, that goes 'round and 'round.

I'm always perplexed when intelligent people like Raissa Robles explain that they don't have much respect for the United Sates for what America did in the Philippines during the Philippine American War. It is such a rigid view, and says so much about the Philippines, locked in place.

This perspective lacks the recognition that America is a shape-shifter, marvelously adept at adapting. America was harshly racist in 1898, the period of which Raissa speaks, and the racism fueled cruel behaviors in the Philippines. But America is dynamic. A land of open voices and ears that listen. Americans have argued about freedoms from the nation's inception, giving women voting rights in 1920 when before they had none. And substantially eradicating racism from 1950 to 1990

Freedom to speak forms the conscience of a nation.

Borg cube

Technology helped  Americans to speak. And accelerated the pace of change. Americans were able to look at the whole of themselves. And not like what they saw.

The most popular racist in America was perhaps Archie Bunker of the highly popular television show "All in the Family" which ran during the 1970's. His portrayal of a loud, stubborn bigot made bigotry look like it is. Ignorant. Archie was followed in the annals of TV history by the black and funny Bill Cosby in a show called "I Spy". Later he had his own show, the "Bill Cosby Show", a family with the wise but dense and totally hilarious Bill Cosby a little like Archie Bunker, but black.

America started liking her blacks. Black athletes. Black preachers like Martin Luther King, whose assassination was a martyr's moment, for sure. A wake-up call. And now a black President.

The historical pudding proved the point. Blacks are neither lazy nor sex addled (at least no more so than whites) nor stupid. Mexicans, too. And Asians.

So the American ethnic composition continues to morph, a little less white every year. And a lot less racially ignorant than 114 years ago.

The American borg, the block of relentless power, is evident in two ways: (1) in global self-interest and military might, and (2) in rabid belief that certain rights like speech, bearing arms, employment opportunity, fairness and safety are not to be curtailed by private or government authoritarianism. In shorter words, America is a relentless borg for:

• Global commercial enrichment.

• Freedom and fairness for its citizens.

What is the Philippines?

Germany and Japan are done with World War II but the Philippines is still fighting its revolutionary wars and its colonizers.

The Philippines retains the same basic social infrastructure as it had during the Spanish colonial period. Religious democracy. Corrupt. Regionalized into self-serving clans and warlords and feudal estates. The dynasties. Never quite a harmonious national entity.

Except those Sunday's twice a year when Pacquiao fights.

It is strange.

Lacking unity to any purpose other than Catholic conservatism, the Philippines cannot progress. It seemingly cannot forget the past and recognize it is over and done with, cannot look ahead and foresee disasters blown in on the winds, cannot comprehend what the relentless abuse of its marvelous natural resources means.

Cannot adapt.

Yes, yes.

Whither Philippines?

The Philippines is an asteroid.

A chunk of rock, sealed in a vacuum of religious irrationality and self-serving authoritarian leadership. Sealed to the pains of history. Unable to apply science and common sense and vision to look ahead and solve problems.

'Round and 'round we go, ever sealed to the past. Unable to find a way to unleash the dynamics of community effort.

• Passing internet libel laws to squelch voices rather than raise them up, to solve problems. The FOI Bill, a tool for raising voices, is not a priority. 

• Relying on personal favor and gain as the basis for employment and business deals, rather than the productive vigor and might of competition and competence and fair play.

'Round and 'round . . . tying things down . . . holding them back . . .

Stuck in self absorption. Afraid to let go . . .

The Seven Commandments of Secular Ethics

Guest Article

by Edgar Lores

In the blogosphere, there has been much discussion about religion and ethics.  These observations have been made:

• Filipinos observe a variety of religions, with Roman Catholics (81%) being in the majority followed by Protestants (6%) and Muslims (5%).

• Despite the religiosity of the Filipino, with 92% professing belief in a higher power, there is widespread unethical behavior.  The Philippines has a ranking of 129 in the 2011 Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International.

• Ethical behavior may not necessarily arise from religiosity but from spirituality.

• Spirituality may be independent of organized religion.

In the face of conflicts in religious beliefs and of improper conduct between and among believers and non-believers, there is a need to arrive at a common understanding of what constitutes the Good.  The Dalai Lama has called for the creation of a secular code of ethics.

• "All the world's major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance and forgiveness can and do promote inner values.  But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate.  This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether."

In response to this call, people have pointed out that there are existing non-religious codes of ethics, such as:

• The Golden Rule
• The Rotary Four-Way Test
• Gandhi's philosophy of non-violence

It must be admitted, however, that none are comprehensive.

Several personalities - including Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, A.C. Grayling, Penn Jilette and Ted Kaczynski - have advanced alternatives to the Ten Commandments.  The first four are known critics of religion and are (or were) atheists, and the fourth is an illusionist as well.  Surprisingly, the fifth is the American murderer known as the "Unabomber".

All of these alternative versions are worthy of study.  The principle objection to these, in the eyes of this author, is that they do not incorporate the principles articulated by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).  They propose ethical norms from a purely individual point of view.  For much of political history and theory, it has been argued and accepted that the State is essentially amoral.  The UDHR rejects this view and advances the concept that the broader behavior of the State vis-à-vis its citizens should be brought under the umbrella of ethics.

Written in 1947 and adopted in 1948, the UDHR is man's greatest cooperative ethical achievement to date.  It is a distillation of mankind's political wisdom in all of recorded history.  It is infused not only with tenets of the Abrahamic faiths but also those of Confucianism.  Consisting of a preface and 30 articles, it is a luminous document, and foundational in its scope, clarity and prescience.

It is not within the purview of this essay, but the question should also be asked: If the State must act ethically towards its citizens, should it not also act ethically towards other States?  

This essay is an attempt at a draft for a comprehensive secular code of ethics.  Before listing the commandments of the code and discussing them, there is one qualification and seven considerations to make.

• The qualification is that the author is a layman.  He is neither a philosopher nor an ethicist.  He is an ordinary person with perhaps a slightly above-average, but not necessarily acute, sense of the failings of men and of himself.

The seven considerations are:

• The code is more a synthesis rather than an original work.  It is a fusion and a reinterpretation of the Abrahamic tradition, Confucianism, and the Eastern religions of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.
• The code is grounded on humanism, on the belief that man is perfectible - if he follows the reasons of the heart and of the mind.  The reasons for its adoption would be the Faith that the good in humanity will prevail, and the Hope that it will.  Or the Hope that the good will prevail, and the Faith that it will.
• The code is comprised of seven normative commandments, and their corollaries, which are mostly self-enforcing.  The corollaries embrace legal constructs and principles only to the extent that they conform to the commandments and are consistent with the UDHR.
• The ultimate goal of the code is to develop a healthy conscience.  While ethical violations may incur legal consequences, the highest penalty that is hoped to be realized is that of a guilty conscience.  The intention is to teach, not to frighten.
• The code seeks to answer the question of the faithless and of the faithful who are losing faith: "What should we teach our children?" 
• If generally accepted, the code can only take root through education by parents, by schools and by society at large.  Education is not only by talk but by practice, not only by thought but by deed.  The code can be formalized as a teaching tool in Civics and Ethics classes at the primary or secondary levels in both sectarian and non-sectarian schools.
• Implicit in the code and in its observance are the attitudes of learning and respect.  These are needed to constantly re-evaluate the code as it is used to clarify and resolve ethical dilemmas.  As envisioned, the commandments are absolute but must be applied relatively.

The Seven Commandments of Secular Ethics

Commandment	Corollary
1. Do no harm.	1.1. This shall include not only harm to fellow human beings but to all living things and to the planet as a whole. 1.2. Where conflict arises, the primacy of the individual human being shall prevail.
2. Observe the rights and freedoms of every individual.	2.1. These are established in (a) the UDHR and (b)  the Constitution of your country. 2.2. Where conflict arises, the UDHR shall prevail over the Constitution.
3. Observe the duties and obligations of every individual.	3.1. These are established in (a) the UDHR, (b) the Constitution of your country, and (c) the rules of your associations. 3.2. Where conflict arises, preceding items in 3.1 shall prevail over succeeding items.
4. Do not lie.	4.1. Seek and know the truth. 4.2. Speak only what is both true and helpful.
5. Do not steal.
6. Observe proper sexual and marital conduct.	6.1. These are established by (a) the UDHR, (b) the laws of your country, (c) your conscience and (d) your religion. 6.2. Where conflict arises, preceding items in 6.1 shall prevail over succeeding items. 6.3. Where the laws of the State, regarding sexual conduct only, conflict with those of Conscience, the latter shall prevail over the former.
7. Honor yourself.	7.1. Avoid substance abuse. 7.2. Avoid overindulgence. 7.3. Be mindful.

First Commandment - Do No Harm

This commandment is derived from the Hippocratic Oath and the Eastern religions.  It is the equivalent of the sixth Biblical commandment of "Thou shalt not kill".

The virtues of this commandment are peace, humaneness, love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness and conservation.

Strangely, the Biblical injunction is limited to the extreme act of killing.  It does not encompass the sense of compassion and environmentalism invoked by the Eastern religions which, as indicated in corollary 1.1, cautions against causing hurt or injury not only to human beings but also to all living things and to the planet itself.

From the viewpoint of Eastern religions, man is not regarded as a sinner by nature and is seen to be perfectible.  In contrast, Christianity regards man as endowed with Original Sin and is seen to be in need of salvation.  In the Christian cosmology, death is perceived as the gateway to the final and eternal destinations of heaven or hell.  In Eastern thought, death is transition, and perfection can be attained within a lifetime albeit after many lives.

Also in the Christian view, man has dominion over the earth in the same manner that God has dominion over the Universe.  In the Eastern view, man is indivisible from nature and must live in balance and harmony with it.

The negative form of the Golden Rule - or the Silver rule of "Do not do unto others what you do not wish to be done unto you" - may be subsumed under this commandment.  The Golden Rule is not universally accepted because of "differences in values and interests", such as sadomasochism as noted by George Bernard Shaw.

The inclusion of a conflict-resolution rule in corollary 1.2 is necessary.  Such a rule is appended to most of the other commandments.  It specifies which construct has primacy in the event of conflict.  These two examples illustrate this principle of primacy:

• Man has stewardship over the earth; animals, plants and minerals may be used in the service of his survival.
• Nations must not prosecute internal or external wars because they are harmful to individuals.

The UDHR does not explicitly contain this commandment, but there are Articles that implicitly embody it such as those against slavery (Article 4) and torture (Article 5).

With respect to killing, there are many, many types that may be classified into four categories.

• There are types that are generally sanctioned by the State and by law, and two of these are killing in defense of the State and in the defense of Self.
• There are types that are countenanced by some States, but not all States, and are deeply controversial.  These include capital punishment, mercy killing, abortion and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.
• Still, there are others accepted by certain cultures, such as honor killing, suicide attacks, self-immolation and revenge killing.  In older and not-so-old cultures, there were human sacrifices, cannibalism, seppuku, suttee (or sati), female infanticide and geronticide (aged people).
• The killing of animals for sport is also culturally accepted as in bullfights, cockfights, dogfights and trophy hunting.  Certain species are culled to balance nature.

The first category may be ethically justifiable as long as they are defensive in nature.  It is hard to develop a hard-and-fast rule for the second category, and judgement may be arrived at on a case-to-case basis.  The last two categories can be said to be ethically irresponsible with the possible exception of self-immolation, seppuku and culling.

Three ethical guidelines to observe are:

• One must not kill for a cause or idea, but one can die for a cause.  The giving of one's life is the highest morality known to man.  Giving in this sense can refer to death or devotion.
• No life is owned by another.
• The fruits of the earth should primarily be used for the basic needs of men in food, clothing and shelter; man should not use more than he needs.  He must conserve natural resources for future generations.

Second Commandment - Human Rights and Freedoms

This commandment does not enumerate what are the human rights and freedoms.  These are already established in the UDHR which has been ratified and accepted by all member nations, and which they are obligated to respect.  A secondary source is the Constitution of individual nations.

The virtues of this commandment are righteousness, prudence and justice.

A prerequisite of this commandment is knowledge and hopefully its application, which is wisdom.  One must know one's rights and freedoms in order to enjoy them and to protect them.

The Constitution of the Philippines echoes and expands the UDHR in two articles.

• Article II - Declaration of Principles and State Policies
• Article III - Bill of Rights.  Note that not all nations have Bill of Rights.

With respect to secularism and this proposed code, the freedom of religion also embraces the freedom from religion.

It is interesting to note that the freedom of opinion and expression as stated in Article 19 contains the clause "regardless of frontiers."  Without doubt, the frontiers referred to here are State borders, but it is nice to imagine that the framers had peered into the future and glimpsed of a time when a concerned Filipino, sitting half a world away, could record his thoughts and have them wafted across frontier-less cyberspace into the heart of the nation.  As in this very essay.

Article 19 gives us the right to criticize, as citizens of the world, the policies of any state, even one that suppresses these very freedoms.

Corollary 2.2 explicitly gives the UDHR primacy over a country's Constitution, although Article 30 already does this. 

Third Commandment - Human Duties and Obligations

If the Second Commandment mainly embodies the rules the State must observe towards its citizens, this commandment embodies the rules that a man must observe towards the State and towards his fellowmen.  Therefore, like the Second Commandment, it requires knowledge of these rules.

The virtues of this commandment are reciprocity, mutual benefit, loyalty and patriotism.

A duty is an act a man must do, and an obligation is an act a man has been asked to do and must fulfill.  To illustrate:

• Voting is a citizen's duty.
• Compulsory voting is an obligation.

This commandment covers the duties and obligations of man in two areas:

• The first area is his participation as a citizen in the governments of the world, his country and his local community.
• The second area is his participation as a member of non-governmental constructs, such as family, company or an associate of organizations, including a church. 

Within the first area:

• Of the 30 articles in the UDHR, only Article 29 touches on each man's obligations to his community and his need to respect the rights and freedoms of others.
• The duties and obligations of a citizen as outlined in the Constitution of his country may touch on the duty of parents, of suffrage and of public office.
• The duties and obligations of government officials in each branch of government may also be outlined in the Constitution of the country.
• Note that the preamble of the US Constitution declares as one of its aims the promotion of the "general Welfare".  And the Philippine Constitution expressedly declares that the "prime duty of government is to serve and protect the people." Are our officials performing their duties and meeting their obligations?

Within the second area:

• The commandment does not lay down the duties and obligations associated with familial roles such as father, mother, spouse and child.  The Ten Commandments itself only mentions the role of children to parents in the Fifth Commandment of "Honor thy father and thy mother".  It is unnecessary to include this precept in the secular code inasmuch as the concept of honor or respect is implicit in its entirety.
• In familial interrelationships, there are many ethical issues, like financial obligations and responsibilities, fidelity, affection, health care, parenting practices, child care, child education, child labor, and aged parents care.  
• In non-familial organizations, a hierarchy of ranks and levels are established and the duties and obligations of each rank and level are specified either formally - for example, in an organization's charter, a company's policy and job descriptions - or informally by common agreement.
• In both familial and non-familial duties and obligations which, for the most part, a man has freely taken on, an attitude of delight, rather than one of sombre observance, will immeasurably lift the heart.

Corollary 3.2 explicitly states the rules of precedence in conflict-resolution.

. 

Fourth Commandment - Do Not Lie

This commandment is almost a universal ethical imperative in all religions.  It is the equivalent of the ninth Biblical commandment of "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor".

The virtues of this commandment are courage, honesty, integrity, humility, trustworthiness, learning, knowledge and kindness.

From the individual view, this commandment may be the hardest to follow.  We trespass it not only on a daily basis, but several times a day.  It is estimated that we lie within 3 minutes of meeting a stranger.  We lie not only to others but to ourselves often in the forms of delusion and denial.  And lying may be an act of commission or omission.

The positive form of this norm can be seen in corollary 4.1, which is to "Seek and know the truth".  To avoid telling a lie, one must know the truth or that whereof one speaks.  Truth is the diametrical opposite of falsehood.  A simple definition of truth is that it is verified knowledge, or that which conforms to reality. 

Thus stated, this commandment loses its humdrum interpretation of simply not uttering falsehoods.  It becomes an impetus to knowing, and the ramifications are enormous.

• It is said that the first realization of knowledge is the state of our ignorance.
• The basic stance of ignorance is often times arrogance when it should be humility and wonder at the mystery of life.  Ignorance is the bliss of Night; knowledge the bliss of Morn.
• To overcome ignorance in order not to lie, man must acquire knowledge and learn.  Learning leads to the wisdom of truth and perchance to the magic of beauty.
• In avoiding lies and seeking knowledge, man transforms his life into a voyage of unending discovery.
• Much of the word is held in the thrall of superstition, with the poor majority scrabbling for survival and the rich minority scrabbling for an ease which cannot be found.
• And yet in the past century, since Einstein's Theory of Relativity, the frontiers of knowledge have been pushed forward to afford us greater glimpses into our nature as human beings and into the nature of the universe.  There have been advances in the study of the brain (neuroplasticity) and of consciousness (noetics), and we have produced more accurate maps of the unimaginably large (astronomy) and the unimaginably small (quantum physics).  We live in exciting times if only we took the trouble - or rather the opportunity - to learn.

Corollary 4.2 derives from Buddhism and the Four-Way Test.  It adds the criteria of intention and beneficence to telling the truth.  In effect, it incorporates the primacy of the First Commandment.  The intention must be one of goodwill.  And the beneficence to be considered is both the effect on the teller and the recipient(s).

This brings us to the issues of telling white lies or gray lies.  Are white lies permissible?  If the wife asks, "Do I look fat in this dress?" and she does, should one tell the truth?  In applying corollary 4.2, the heart must consider the intention or goal of marital accord, and the mind the beneficence of kindness.  Your kindness to your wife gives her esteem and proof of your continuing affection; and, in turn, your wife's kindness to you is not to commit murder, which is in violation of the First Commandment.

Gray lies are not permissible.  They are distortions of truth, previously referred to as propaganda and now as "spin".  These are contained in the daily output of columnists in print media and of trolls in social media.  They are unethical in their intention to manipulate people by shading facts in the more than fifty shades of gray.

The UDHR does not explicitly include this ethical imperative.

Fifth Commandment - Do Not Steal

Like the Fourth Commandment, this commandment is almost a universal ethical imperative in all religions.  It is the equivalent of the eighth Biblical commandment of "Thou shalt not steal".

The virtues of this commandment are integrity, charity, generosity and sharing.

This commandment and the preceding one are perhaps the most important precepts that should be emphasized in the training of the young.  If these can be fully instilled in the minds of children, they will go a long way to diminishing the problem of corruption in the citizen and in the government. 

There are two often-cited exceptions to the immorality of stealing:

• In Islam, a man may steal food if he is hungry.  The onus is on the community to exercise and promote social justice in such a way that no man goes hungry.
• In the tale of Robin Hood, a man may steal from the rich to give to the poor.

The lesson to take away, as with lying and kindness, is not that stealing is allowed or can be good, rather it is that ethics is not all "Do Not's".  It is not just avoiding doing bad deeds but, more so, doing good deeds.  And the virtues of generosity and sharing brighten our lives immeasurably, as highlighted in the celebrations of gift-giving in all religions and cultures, such as Christmas, Chanukah, Mawlid-al-Nabi, Lunar New Year and Diwali. 

Like the Fourth Commandment, the UDHR does not explicitly include this ethical imperative.

Sixth Commandment - Sexual and Marital Conduct

This is by far the longest of the commandments which may not be surprising.  Sex is a major preoccupation of man.  One study has estimated than men think of sex up to 388 times a day and women 140 times.  And it is mostly in this area, rather than in the preceding commandments, that religions seem to want to control human behavior.  The seventh Biblical commandment is not all-encompassing and merely states, "Thou shalt not commit adultery".

The virtues of this commandment are continence and tolerance.  More than these are their fruit, which is pure and simple delight.

  

The UDHR has only one provision concerning marriage and family.  It is silent on sexual conduct.  There are three sub-articles in Article 16: 

• (1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
• (2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
• (3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

With respect to the on-going controversy surrounding same-sex marriage, the framers may not have anticipated this issue, but the first and second sub-articles can be interpreted to mean that such arrangements are not disallowed.  However, the third sub-article qualifies that the concept of family is subject to the laws of the State.  A number of countries have begun to allow same-sex marriages, and may be said to be erring on the side of liberality.

In corollary 6.2, the State has dominion over Conscience and Religion in matters of marital arrangements.  However since sexual conduct is in the personal domain, it may be said, as corollary 6.3 does, that Conscience has primacy over the State and over Religion.  That being said, it is a sad fact that sexual mores differ from country to country, and that in following our natural orientations we may be placing ourselves in legal and theological hot water.

• Until 2003, a number of US states still carried sodomy laws in their books.  These antiquated laws typically prohibited acts like oral and anal sex, which are no longer considered to be paraphilia between consenting adults, even for same-sex couples.
• The use of artificial contraception is a great issue with the Roman Catholic Church.  True believers should follow the tenets of their faith.  Where there is conflict between the dictates of doctrine and those of conscience, it should be left to the individual to resolve these. 

Seventh Commandment - Honor Yourself

If the First Commandment is ethical consideration of others and of the planet, the last and Seventh Commandment is ethical consideration of our selves.  And if the Fourth and Fifth Commandments are the ones to be primarily instilled in the young, this commandment is the one we should practice in all our stages of development.  It is a reversal of the Golden Rule, a recognition that we must, perhaps first and foremost, take care of ourselves in order to take care of others and of everything around us.  It calls into mind the Latin dictum, "mens sana in corpore sano".

The virtues of this commandment are health, temperance, cleanliness, acuity or clear perception, and inner peace.

The first corollary 7.1 points to the traditional substances prohibited by religions, namely alcohol, drugs and tobacco.  The term substance abuse is used to describe addiction to these intoxicants which can take a great toll on man's well-being - his body, his mind and his wallet.  The central truth of living may be suffering because of craving and aversion, but to use intoxicants to salve the pain ironically increases craving for them, and ultimately results in greater suffering.

The law treats the use of these intoxicants in different ways.

• There are no laws directly prohibiting alcohol intake for adults, only laws that limit its effects such as Driving Under the Influence (DUI) regulations.
• Similarly, tobacco is not directly prohibited, although laws regulating where smoking is not permitted have mushroomed in Western countries.
• Among the three, drugs are the most prohibited substance, although the medicinal use of marijuana has been legalized in Canada, Israel and the Czech Republic.  Lately, two states in America, Washington and Colorado, have declared marijuana to be legal.

The second corollary of 7.2 extends the first corollary to immoderate attachments that would adversely affect one's health.  These can include physical and mental obsessions like gambling, watching television, viewing pornography, video gaming, cutting and mobile phone use.  And it can include food-related compulsions like overeating, over-dieting, carbonated drinks and even chocolates.  Certain of these activities and items may not be unhealthy in and of themselves; it is overindulgence in them that we must guard against.

The third and last corollary is a positive norm, and it can be said to be the equivalent of the fourth Biblical commandment of "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy".  Mindfulness has many meanings but basically it is the attitude of focusing and unfocusing the body and the mind.  It consists of the wisdom that there is a time for everything.  There is a time to be with others for companionship, drinking, dancing and rowdy celebration.  And there is a time to be alone for introspection, silence and quiet contemplation.

When we are awake and engaged in an activity, we must pay attention to get the best results; later on certain activities become automatic but when a problem arises we need to recall attention.  During the day, we must pause and take breaks; and at the end of the day, we must pause longer in sleep.  If we are of the mind, we can listen to music, or sit still in silence or reflect on the beauty around us - in a stone, a leaf, the shimmering sea or the dome of stars above.

Again like the Fourth and Fifth Commandments, the UDHR does not explicitly include this ethical imperative.

Additional Notes

• Corollaries 2.1, 3.1 and 6.1 contain the phrase "your country".  This would normally refer to the country of which you are a citizen.  However the globe has become a cluster of villages, and we sometimes work or travel outside our villages. Thus country here may refer to your temporary physical location.  As a guest, one must observe the "When in Rome" idiom. This is easy to say when the issue is public display of affections in Mecca, but what about the wearing, or prohibiting the wearing of, burqas in Paris?
• A third corollary to the First Commandment, or an Eighth Commandment, may be added to indicate the primacy of the First Commandment.  This built-in self-protective mechanism would be similar to Article 30 of the UDHR or the third law of Asimov's Laws of Robotics.  It can be stated thus:
• Where conflict arises between or among the Commandments, the First Commandment shall prevail.
• On the Second Commandment, the UDHR covers the ethics of plagiarism in Article 27.  Much opprobrium has been heaped on Senator Tito Sotto and it would serve him - and the people he serves - in good stead if he studied the UDHR and acquired a modicum of ethics.
• (2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
• With the exception of the Fourth, the Fifth Commandment is the least observed in the Philippines.  If government officials, servants and politicians took this commandment to heart, the country would be paradise enow.
• On the Sixth Commandment:

• Arguably, this Commandment is the most preached on and the most violated by the Church.  If the clergy had observed its vows of celibacy, it would not have lost its moral authority.
• Homosexuality and heterosexual cohabitation are socially acceptable in the Philippines.  Except for the limits imposed by the age of consent, both are legal but frowned upon by religion.

• With respect to the Seventh Commandment, the so-called Sin Tax Bill does not control the use alcohol or tobacco.  It purportedly seeks to minimize use but more to increase government revenue from them.

Summary

• Is man perfectible? The answer has to be in the affirmative.  There are men who died for their country, like Jose Rizal.  There are men who lived for their country, like Jesse Robredo.  And there are men who gained the whole world and did not lose their souls, like Bill Gates.

• Should religions follow the Seven Commandments of Secular Ethics?  Again, the answer must be Yes.  All the commandments, except the Second and the Third, are based on religion.  The author suspects that if men of the cloth observed these rules of secular ethics, they would become better messengers of their respective faiths.

• If the Seven Commandments of Secular Ethics can be summed up in one word, that word would be Respect.  It is all about Respect.  Respect for life and for the earth, for the rights and freedom of others, for our duties and obligations, for truth and knowledge, for the property of others, for sexual and marital relationships, and for the self.

  Sources:

1. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml)
2. The Ten Commandments (http://godstenlaws.com/ten-commandments/index.html#.UKIf34cslyI)
3. The Laws of Robotics (http://www.auburn.edu/~vestmon/robotics.html)
4. How Often Do Men and Women Think about Sex?  (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201112/how-often-do-men-and-women-think-about-sex)
5. The Scale of the Universe 2 (http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white)