Holy crap! Spock was a pinko!
God, Morals, and Atheists
by UnDisfellowshipped 151 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
beksbks
Sorry SLoon, it's been a long weird day, and I can only be serious for sooooooo long. Now pick up that blankey mister and quit whining!
By the way, I have zero problem with folks having thier crutch (religion) but we seem to have forgotten the whole separation of church and state thing over the last many years.
-
beksbks
Spock was logical! "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
-
BurnTheShips
That is probably the only quote Beks can post without having to resort to cut n paste.
-
beksbks
At least I've got one Mr. Cut-N-Paste
-
John Doe
After seeing some recent demonstrations of christian "morals," I am filled with abject contempt for threads such as this one.
-
quietlyleaving
undisfellowshipped
my very simple answer to your very complicated question is that there is objective thinking. It seems to me that by dismissing all human thinking, for example, as subjective, you are missing this important point.
edit: I haven't read all of the discussion, but have read all of your posts undisfellowshipped, to grasp your argurment, so excuse me if the point I've made has already been covered.
-
Caedes
"Wouldn't the beginnings of a moral code start when humans became aware that they were conscious individual beings? This awareness would be then be applied to offspring (to give nourishment and protection etc). As family units came together for protection and ease of finding food, wouldn't social codes be the first thing sorted out? Being aware of our individual consciousness brings personal responsibility in our thoughts and actions with one another in the social realm."
If Naturalistic/Materialistic evolution is true, and IF blind chance and mindless physical laws can account for humans becoming aware that they were conscious individual beings, and IF blind chance and mindless physical laws can account for humans acquiring a sense of responsibility, then, yes, tentatively, I will say that that theory does seem plausible. (only IF it is plausible that the blind, mindless physical laws, chance, and time brought about the human consciousness and awareness).
Undisfellowshipped,
So what you are admitting there is that atheism is internally consistant and entirely consistant with moral behaviour with no objective morality required. So your argument is entirely void.
As an atheist I am good 'just because', I want to live in a society where people act morally and since I am not a hypocrite then it is reasonable to act morally myself. I have no problem with the idea that morality is dictated by societal norms and that thus morality will change over time (much like the morality of the old testament is not the same as the morality portrayed by Jesus in the gospels; and also like modern christianity uses a different set of morals to both)
How about answering a question on your morals would you murder your own child if your god told you to? When you have answered that question perhaps you might understand why theists complaining about moral relativity is just a tiny bit hypocritical.
-
Caedes
Monty,
You accusing another poster of having to 'resort' to cut and paste - ahh the irony.
How much reactionary bullshit have you cut and pasted over the years? In fact did you not get your posting priviledges rescinded at one point for cnp'ing too much right wing propaganda?
-
BurnTheShips
Caedes, you did not get the humor of my post. Apparently you have the sense of humor of a dead fish, and an atheist one at that, which is even more humorless than the normal variety of dead fish and has no hope of an afterlife in the Great Celestial Aquarium, which itself explains a large part of the humorlessness.
BTS