In A Man Without a Country (2005) p. 80–81 Vonnegut makes a very similar statement:
God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian (1999)
Context: About belief or lack of belief in an afterlife: Some of you may know that I am neither Christian nor Jewish nor Buddhist, nor a conventionally religious person of any sort.
I am a humanist, which means, in part, that I have tried to behave decently without any expectation of rewards or punishments after I'm dead. My German-American ancestors, the earliest of whom settled in our Middle West about the time of our Civil War, called themselves "Freethinkers," which is the same sort of thing. My great grandfather Clemens Vonnegut wrote, for example, "If what Jesus said was good, what can it matter whether he was God or not?"
I myself have written, "If it weren't for the message of mercy and pity in Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, I wouldn't want to be a human being. I would just as soon be a rattlesnake."
In A Man Without a Country (2005) p. 80–81 Vonnegut makes a very similar statement:
How do humanists feel about Jesus? I say of Jesus, as all humanists do. "If what he said is good, and so much of it is absolutely beautiful, what does it matter if he was God or not?"
But if Christ hadn't delivered the Sermon on the Mount, with its message of mercy and pity, I wouldn't want to be a human being.
I'd just as soon be a rattlesnake.
God Bless You, Dr. Kevorkian (1999)
“I neither oblige the belief of other person, nor overhastily subscribe mine own.”
The History of England, Book ii
Context: I neither oblige the belief of other person, nor overhastily subscribe mine own. Nor have I stood with others computing or collating years and chronologies, lest I should be vainly curious about the time and circumstance of things, whereof the substance is so much in doubt. By this time, like one who had set out on his way by night, and travelled through a region of smooth or idle dreams, our history now arrives on the confines, where daylight and truth meet us with a clear dawn, representing to our view, though at a far distance, true colours and shapes.
Writing for the court, Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947).
The Black Cat (1843)
“There are in nature neither rewards nor punishments — there are consequences.”
"The Christian Religion" The North American Review, August 1881 http://books.google.com/books?id=OPmfAAAAMAAJ&q=%22There+are+in+nature+neither+rewards+nor+punishments+there+are+consequences%22&pg=PA14#v=onepage http://ebooks.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=nora&cc=nora&view=image&seq=121&idno=nora0133-2
Variants:
We must remember that in nature there are neither rewards nor punishments there are consequences. The life and death of Christ do not constitute an atonement. They are worth the example, the moral force, the heroism of benevolence, and in so far as the life of Christ produces emulation in the direction of goodness, it has been of value to mankind.
As published in Some Reasons Why (1895) http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/some_reasons_why.html
In nature, there are neither rewards nor punishments — there are consequences.
Letters and Essays, 3rd Series. Some Reasons Why, viii.
Source: The Christian Religion An Enquiry
Context: There are in nature neither rewards nor punishments — there are consequences. The life of Christ is worth its example, its moral force, its heroism of benevolence.
“I am the truth, since I am part of what is real, but neither more nor less than those around me.”
Source: The Necessary Angel: Essays on Reality and the Imagination
A man must say what he believes clearly, without dogma, and without guile.
Statement during the 1968 election campaign, as quoted in party literature. "Pierre Elliott Trudeau for Canada", 1968 leaflet http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau-for-Canada-1968-Leaflet-Bill-Vander-Zalm-Liberal-Party-BC/322004097304?_trksid=p2045573.c100033.m2042&_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20131017132637%26meid%3D9020a37aa0b24dd68f1d3f5025b50b52%26pid%3D100033%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D381542319016
Against the Galilaeans (c. 362)
Context: All of us, without being taught, have attained to a belief in some sort of divinity, though it is not easy for all men to know the precise truth about it, nor is it possible for those who do know it to tell it to all men. … Surely, besides this conception which is common to all men, there is another also. I mean that we are all by nature so closely dependent on the heavens and the gods that are visible therein, that even if any man conceives of another god besides these, he in every case assigns to him the heavens as his dwelling-place; not that he thereby separates him from the earth, but he so to speak establishes the King of the All in the heavens as in the most honourable place of all, and conceives of him as overseeing from there the affairs of this world. What need have I to summon Hellenes and Hebrews as witnesses of this? There exists no man who does not stretch out his hands towards the heavens when he prays; and whether he swears by one god or several, if he has any notion at all of the divine, he turns heavenward. And it was very natural that men should feel thus.
