Golden Rule

 The Golden Rule, as it is generally stated -- do to others as you would have them do to you, cannot be taken literaly.  Taken literally it is unworkable.  We would not punish criminals if we took it strictly, nor even fire incompetent or dishonest employees.  Worda can never be taken literally.  They must be interpreted.

Something more workable is the rule of compassion and non-judgmentalism.  We do what is best for the person, even if punishment is best, we don't seek revenge and never need to forgive since we don't take offense or hold grudges, and we try to understand why people do bad things (childhood, poverty, mental illness, sociopathy, etc., even though sometimes we can't know the person well enough to say, we understand in the end we are all animals with desires and instincts.

We are not naive -- when we know a person is a con artist or thief or liar or whatever, we recognize and accept that fact and adjust what we do accordingly, but it is just a fact, not a judgment in any sort of moral sense -- that is not up to us to do.

Further, we ignore most authority and tradition and conscience.  They tend to produce fairly good guides on how to behave, but not always, as they derive from cultural development rather than rational thought.  I try to apply Kant (don't do something you would not want everyone to be free to do) and of course utilitarian notions to the extent possible (try to figure out what in the end will do the most good and least harm).