[JohnPlace]

Originally Posted by Mark Lapierre

Do you believe spirituality actually provides answers?

Yes. Symbolic answers, if not scientific ones. The symbolism is our attempt to grasp the things which cannot quite be grasped, and the answers we ascertain may be just as true as any bit of logic or science. More true in many ways, less true in others.

but not necessarily an answer behind that certainty.

Oftentimes the answer and the certainty are viewed as the same thing, coming from the same source.
Answers may, in fact, map quite well to logical arguments.

If a man turns to some form of religion to decide on the morality of cheating, he's not looking for an answer, but rather the relief an authoritative source can provide from the stress of making the decision on his own.

This is a less than generous view of the matter, in my humble opinion -- and it sounds like the view of someone on the outside looking in, or perhaps someone on the inside trying to get out.

If a person honestly believes in a God (take the Christian God for example), and he truthfully believes that this one all-knowing God possesses the one and only correct answer, then he may, in fact, be seeking truth, not just attempting to avoid making his own decisions.

The fact is this: There is no morally "right" answer to the question of whether or not cheating is wrong that a skilled debator couldn't shred into a million pieces. That's the problem with both logic *and* religious dogma. The difference is that dogma provides a structure, a culture, a hierarchy, a whole bunch of other people of perceived authority, and a higher power to support an opinion (and while religious opinions do differ, here it's a matter of who your system trusts vs. who it doesn't), whereas moral logic often sways with popular opinion and can appear quite liquid as a result -- often with the feeling of isolation.

Of course, I could easily flip those definitions upside down and make logic the more concrete of the two -- and that's precisely my point. There will always be people (large numbers of them, in fact) who naturally gravitate to one system or another because of their own individual needs.

Many people will meld logic and dogma together, finding neither satisfactory in isolation.

Neither science nor religion nor spirituality nor logic is necessary to answer the question of "is cheating wrong"; it's a matter of consideration for others, and of having the foresight to see that immediate gratification will have lasting repercussions.

But those are your arguments, your axioms. And you find the vehicle or your own logic quite satisfactory as a means of understanding them. And while large numbers of people would agree with you, one need only visit a forum like this one to see that every bit of logic can be challenged.

The question, then, boils down to which moral system provides the greatest comfort to the individual.

I think we should make a distinction between religion and spirituality. As far as I'm aware, spirituality is less rigid than religion, and thus not so concerned with laws, but rather with personal interpretation of experiences. It's implicit where religion is explicit. Jenny summarised religion and spirituality well, I believe.

Yes, this distinction is an important one. Religion is "narrower" in many ways, but "deeper" too. Without man's nearly universal need for spirituality it's unlikely religion would have ever taken hold to the extent that it has, and it is this very need that will keep it from ever going away.