1.5.12.3 The Golden Rule and Core Values

Version 1.0 October 2022                             (Previous Version)

The Golden Rule is treated as a trivial motherhood statement by cynical or unaware people.  However, it is a well-known and influential fundamental expression of our obligations to other people:

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.

This rule is stated explicitly in all traditional world religions. 

The Golden Rule is an integral half of Jesus’s “greatest commandment�, which is a summary of a Christian’s obligations:

‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind’.  This is the first and greatest commandment. ^ And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.  (Matthew 22:36-39, see also Mark 12:30-31)

The Golden Rule has a similar effect to the rule proposed by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) that he called the Categorical Imperative:

Act as if the maxim of your action were to become a universal law.

We can imagine that each action we take complies with a general rule or maxim.  If you donate to a charity, the maxim could be ‘Regularly give what you can to help those in need’.   Then if you fall on hard times and need help, others following this rule should provide donations, which help you.  If you steal from another, the maxim could be ‘It’s OK to steal’ and others may feel free to steal from you, and society would be chaotic.  So it's similar, but not that same as, do unto others.

If the Golden Rule were followed universally then the world would be a much better place. 

If I were suffering, due to hunger, thirst, homelessness, illness or injury, loneliness, abuse, oppression, delusion, ignorance etc,

Then I would have you help me to reduce my suffering to the extent that you are able,

So I will help you in the same way if you are in a similar situation.

If I have done something shameful, hurtful, or stupid, etc

Then I know I have to accept the consequences, but

Also I would have you forgive me, help me, and not banish me,

So I will help you in the same way if you are in a similar situation.

These kinds of application of the Golden Rule are supported in REALigion, because they are consistent with the application of our core values.  Valuing Truth and Reality means we consciously and diligently ascertain the relevant facts: the suffering or shame, and suitable responses.  Valuing Life, Love, Equality and Responsibility means that of course we wish to preserve the lives and minimize the suffering of others, as we would of ourselves, while accepting appropriate consequences of any wrongdoing. 

But the simple rule does have some limitations, especially when applied across different cultures, not just different religious, political or ethnic groups, but also between generations in the same group. 

If I have been dishonoured, because my adult son/daughter had consensual sex outside marriage,

Or had sex with someone unacceptable to me (of a different caste or race, or of the same sex),

Then I would have you help me to punish my son/daughter, and/or the person they had sex with,

So I will help you in the same way if you are in a similar situation.

These days, in virtually all countries, and in the mainstream of all traditional world religions, so-called honour killings are totally unacceptable.  Other non-fatal punishments such as disfigurement by throwing acid in someone’s face, or severe beatings, or gang rape, are equally unacceptable. 

But there remain significantly large minorities, especially in (primarily Hindu) India and the Islamic world in which honour crimes such as these continue to be perpetrated.   Often honour crimes are not pursued by local law enforcement agencies.  In Afghanistan under the Taliban and in Saudi Arabia the government itself enforces brutal punishments for sex outside marriage.

These kinds of application of the Golden Rule are contrary to the core values of REALigion. 

●   Adults having consensual sex, especially if neither party is married to someone else (or in a committed relationship), is not of itself harmful, and in fact usually brings significant happiness and contributes to well-being.

●   Valuing Truth and Reality allows us to ascertain these facts: that the sexual relations are not harmful and probably joyful. 

●   By valuing Diversity we allow other people to make informed decisions that may be contrary to our preferences.  It is OK to choose to ignore arbitrary societal restrictions on behaviour that have no justification except tradition.  This includes restrictions on sex itself (eg no sex outside marriage) and restrictions on who you can associate with (based solely on class, caste, race, sex).

●   By valuing Life and Love we applaud giving joy to each other and deplore killing and other harms.

●   By valuing Equality we allow our adult children to make their own moral decisions, but especially decisions that are not essentially moral (because they involve no harm, other than to the mooted family reputation) but relate to arbitrary social restrictions.

●   By valuing Responsibility we are more concerned with intervening to prevent the extreme harm of death, disfigurement, beating or rape, than with intervening to prevent harmless, healthy sex.

●   We can also assess that for the family itself, preserving the family honour is not worth the cost of killing, disfiguring, beating or raping a family member or their sexual partner.  The family should respond by caring for everyone in the family, to ensure there is no harm or suffering, and reject the notion of family honour and repudiate any negative responses from the rest of society. 

My child’s life and happiness is more important to me than your ignorant condemnation.

So the Golden Rule is an ancillary value, not a core value, not the central guiding principle that many people think it is or should be.  The Golden Rule should be followed only to the extent that its application is consistent with our core values.

We summarise our conclusions in this area as follows: