Fff I am opening a petition to rename this "the Anti SJW" thread or something like that
you guys are being ridiculous
Left-wing atheists>>>>
I swear you randomly open this thread every few weeks and post the same thing. We're in the middle of a pretty interesting conversation about morals if your intellect can't keep up there's plenty of other thread right up your alley.
Religious people who still believe they operate under "god-given" morality are comletely deluding themselves. They use secular morality just as much as everyone else. Secular morality is what makes them skip over the parts of the bible which demand gay men,rape victims,people who work on Sabbath (to name a few) to be stoned and praise all the feel good parts of the bible as simply awe-inspiring and "the reason for our morality today".
exactly!
but how sad it must be for religious people to have that logic that they need to be good person only to be rewarded in their afterlife. Can't they be good people without getting a cookie for it?
Did our society believe that a society would believe homosexuality, transgenderism, and abortion would be right and acceptable 90 years ago? There is just no way to tell, but I'm sure atheist wouldn't mind if they did, right?
So you would agree that thinking homophobia being wrong stems from culture ?[/QUOTE]
I have no reason to disagree with that.[/QUOTE]
You're pretty much right there with the homosexuality but the key difference is that homosexuality, transgenderism, abortion is giving more rights to people while not stripping any rights to other people. Pedophilia would strip children of their right, murder would strip other people right, they'll never be acceptable for those reasons.
But yeah there you are, atheist morals stems from culture, a culture that borrowed from religious teachings, and also created new morals standard which were also borrowed by religious teachings in order to evolve and adapt to modern society. We both learn from each other what it comes to morals.
as long as you pretend to be a muslim you're okay, you can't live there as a none believer or you won't be breathing fresh air, even if you believe in other religions it's not acceptable and it's punished (if you're saudi of course), if you're a foreigner i don't think you'll have a problem but you can't practice your religion in public
Atheists in Saudi Arabia deserve to get all the respect in the world tbh!
Pedophilia is neither good or bad
Murder is neither good or bad
Rape is neither good or bad
All of the above are neutral.
How a society views these things determine whether they are acceptable or not.
Or, does this best reflect your view:
(B) Objectively speaking,
Pedophilia is wrong and never right
Murder is wrong and never right
Rape is wrong and never right
All the above are definitely wrong and never acceptable.
The offenses listed above are wrong regardless of whether a society believes they are acceptable or not
I swear you randomly open this thread every few weeks and post the same thing. We're in the middle of a pretty interesting conversation about morals if your intellect can't keep up there's plenty of other thread right up your alley.
Pedophilia is neither good or bad
Murder is neither good or bad
Rape is neither good or bad
All of the above are neutral.
How a society views these things determine whether they are acceptable or not.
Or, does this best reflect your view:
(B) Objectively speaking,
Pedophilia is wrong and never right
Murder is wrong and never right
Rape is wrong and never right
All the above are definitely wrong and never acceptable.
The offenses listed above are wrong regardless of whether a society believes they are acceptable or not
People have given you their opinion on this for two straight pages. The topic is done and you are merely repeating things that have been answered quite elaborately before.
You are asking for objective opinions when people have told you before they consider those things to be subjective. People consider murder and the like as wrong because they have infringe on basic rights that we, society collectively, believe people have. We believe those rights to be important and they came about from hundreds of years of reasoning what is the closest thing to laws that benefit society as a whole the most.
It sounds like you are fishing hard for a post you can then spin as a "see I knew atheists have nothing against murder" narrative and it's tiring.
Quote:
Originally posted by LoKoPaNdA
I don't find bigotry interesting, personally.
Quote me the bigrotry please.
And yes @ALQ I have huge respect for people in muslim countries who openly admit to being atheists and/or try to make actual change as reformers
Pedophilia is neither good or bad
Murder is neither good or bad
Rape is neither good or bad
All of the above are neutral.
How a society views these things determine whether they are acceptable or not.
Or, does this best reflect your view:
(B) Objectively speaking,
Pedophilia is wrong and never right
Murder is wrong and never right
Rape is wrong and never right
All the above are definitely wrong and never acceptable.
The offenses listed above are wrong regardless of whether a society believes they are acceptable or not
atheism is just a lack of a belief in god. There's no rules to follow atheism like religions do. Most atheists became atheist because of either lack of evidence for supernatural things and/or horrible bigotry that is being taught with such dangerous belief system. You came here talking about atheism and the topics about rape, cannibalism, etc. etc. when the awfully majority of people who do such crimes are RELIGIOUS people. Again, if atheists have no morals, why are only 0,4% of US prisoners non-believers?
People have given you their opinion on this for two straight pages. The topic is done and you are merely repeating things that have been answered quite elaborately before.
You are asking for objective opinions when people have told you before they consider those things to be subjective. People consider murder and the like as wrong because they have infringe on basic rights that we, society collectively, believe people have. We believe those rights to be important and they came about from hundreds of years of reasoning what is the closest thing to laws that benefit society as a whole the most.
It sounds like you are fishing hard for a post you can then spin as a "see I knew atheists have nothing against murder" narrative and it's tiring.
Quote me the bigrotry please.
And yes @ALQ I have huge respect for people in muslim countries who openly admit to being atheists and/or try to make actual change as reformers
The reason it appears I'm asking the same question is because I'm getting conflicting answers.
Many of you are saying that you believe morality to be subjective, yet you post something like this:
Quote:
People consider murder and the like as wrong because they have infringe on basic rights that we, society collectively, believe people have. We believe those rights to be important and they came about from hundreds of years of reasoning what is the closest thing to laws that benefit society as a whole the most.
Which implies that you believe in some objective moral standard or that some things are absolutely wrong. You're seemingly talking out of both sides of your mouth and choosing both options instead of one. I was just trying to make the question and choices as clear and basic as possible to get an idea of which side you leaned on most.
But I agree, this conversation has gone on long enough. Thanks to everybody who took the time to respond. FBF, AvrilLaQueen, Lucas32, The Unforgiving, Fabbriche, and everybody else who commented. Your responses were informative and greatly appreciated
But I agree, this conversation has gone on long enough. Thanks to everybody who took the time to respond. FBF, AvrilLaQueen, Lucas32, The Unforgiving, Fabbriche, and everybody else who commented. Your responses were informative and greatly appreciated
Feel free to comeback if you have any other questions
You're missing the point. I'm not talking about societies, which are just a group of people who abide by somebody else's idea of morality. I'm talking about morality itself. If you believe that morality is subjective, then like with attraction or taste, morality is and should be determined by each individual. If morality is subjective than somebody who believes pedophilia and rape are morally right should be looked at and treated the exact same way as somebody who doesn't, as both would be right, and one wouldn't be more right than the other. Isn't this what a true atheistic society looks like?. No order, no structure, no rules. Everybody does what they believe is right. Perhaps I'm wrong though.
If you believe in a Creator, then you believe in a moral law giver. You believe that there are some things that are absolutely right and there are some things that are absolutely wrong, and that God, or the Creator, sets that standard. So I believe homophobia-- that is, treating and judging homosexuals as second class citizen, like how black people were treated in the past--i.e., not allowing them in your business, not sitting next to them, not acknowledging that they're people too, etc.-- is wrong because my God has instructed us to love everybody including our enemies (not saying homosexuals are my enemies, just pointing out how if I'm supposed to love my enemies, then how much more am I expected to love homosexuals, who are not my enemies).
But this isn't about my beliefs. Somebody can resurrect the Christian thread if they want to talk about Christianity. This is about Atheism/Agnosticism. I'm genuinely interested in what and how you guys think, and there is no judgment here (believe it or not). I'm not trying to convince you to accept my beliefs or that your beliefs are wrong, I'm just simply presenting evidence as I see it and hoping for your perspective on it. To even enlighten me if possible on your worldview.
This is a good point, tbh.
A lot of philosophy-based Atheists make the argument that, because there is no logical or scientific justification for the existence of something like the disabled, that we should be allowed to kill them.
I mean, if a young woman is stuck on a feeding tube, surely it'd be fine to just kill her? To let her parents kill her? She'd be nothing more than like a pet cat getting too fat if you take away the ideas of morality. So what would y'all say to Atheists who believe they should have the right to kill that girl, that they're helping the Earth because humans statistically are only depleting our agriculture and that someone who cannot fend for themselves is, by science's definition, worthless and expendable?
So how do y'all as Atheists reconcile with the subsets of Atheism like this? The far-right Atheists, the anarcho-Atheists, etc. who think we're all just beasts (as backed up by science) and life is simply survival of the fittest with no meaning or "purpose" (since the idea of having 'purpose' & such is a religious 'nonsense invention'), etc.? Surely then laws, morality, etc. are constructions that defy science and should be rebuked by Atheists?
If morality is subjective, why is it then wrong for Islamist countries to do what they do if it fits within the realms of their morality? Of their views of right and wrong? Surely then if that's a no (that the things they do ARE wrong), then there has to be a human component - a moral (not per se religious), metaphysical element that suggests humans are greater beings than science can measure (we can't articulate WHY humans can feel emotions that other species cannot) and there is a purposeful, spiritual (again, not religious - though maybe spirituality is simply a valid man-made construction?) reasoning to human existence if humans believe there to be such?
If science cannot measure the reasoning and motivations for humans to want to feel purposeful and their complex emotions, or that it cannot explain why the brain can even imagine or believe in concepts like 'religion', then science cannot be the only answer to life. Not to suggest religion holds the answers, but that the human mind is then far greater than for either science or religion to yet understand / deconstruct. If science was the end-all, be-all, murder should be legal then. Something being "illegal" shouldn't then even be something we know if, since morality is constructionist nonsense compared to the clinical and cold reality of science.
How can you believe as an Atheist that science is the only 100% valid answer to the world's questions and then believe a thing like constructed morality to be real or valid or okay? Morality then should make you laugh and you should allow people to do what they want as science has no opinion on right or wrong in the context of this construction known as "morality" - let children smoke and drink, let people rape and kill, let people do heinous acts because science has no concern for these things on something as imaginary as a construct like "morality". How do y'all as Atheists reconcile with this VALID conclusion that many people take away from the science-based absolutism that is preached by Atheists?
A lot of philosophy-based Atheists make the argument that, because there is no logical or scientific justification for the existence of something like the disabled, that we should be allowed to kill them.
I mean, if a young woman is stuck on a feeding tube, surely it'd be fine to just kill her? To let her parents kill her? She'd be nothing more than like a pet cat getting too fat if you take away the ideas of morality. So what would y'all say to Atheists who believe they should have the right to kill that girl, that they're helping the Earth because humans statistically are only depleting our agriculture and that someone who cannot fend for themselves is, by science's definition, worthless and expendable?
So how do y'all as Atheists reconcile with the subsets of Atheism like this? The far-right Atheists, the anarcho-Atheists, etc. who think we're all just beasts (as backed up by science) and life is simply survival of the fittest with no meaning or "purpose" (since the idea of having 'purpose' & such is a religious 'nonsense invention'), etc.? Surely then laws, morality, etc. are constructions that defy science and should be rebuked by Atheists?
If morality is subjective, why is it then wrong for Islamist countries to do what they do if it fits within the realms of their morality? Of their views of right and wrong? Surely then if that's a no (that the things they do ARE wrong), then there has to be a human component - a moral (not per se religious), metaphysical element that suggests humans are greater beings than science can measure (we can't articulate WHY humans can feel emotions that other species cannot) and there is a purposeful, spiritual (again, not religious - though maybe spirituality is simply a valid man-made construction?) reasoning to human existence if humans believe there to be such?
If science cannot measure the reasoning and motivations for humans to want to feel purposeful and their complex emotions, or that it cannot explain why the brain can even imagine or believe in concepts like 'religion', then science cannot be the only answer to life. Not to suggest religion holds the answers, but that the human mind is then far greater than for either science or religion to yet understand / deconstruct. If science was the end-all, be-all, murder should be legal then. Something being "illegal" shouldn't then even be something we know if, since morality is constructionist nonsense compared to the clinical and cold reality of science.
How can you believe as an Atheist that science is the only 100% valid answer to the world's questions and then believe a thing like constructed morality to be real or valid or okay? Morality then should make you laugh and you should allow people to do what they want as science has no opinion on right or wrong in the context of this construction known as "morality" - let children smoke and drink, let people rape and kill, let people do heinous acts because science has no concern for these things on something as imaginary as a construct like "morality". How do y'all as Atheists reconcile with this VALID conclusion that many people take away from the science-based absolutism that is preached by Atheists?
There's no intersect between morality and science. Science (which is ultimately indisputable unless you're wishing to challenge some theory with TESTABLE evidence) allows us to explain the world around us. You're trying to construct science as a some sort of religious social construct when it simply is not. Same with loveless. Rape/murder/etc. are not "scientifically morally neutral" as y'all are trying to spin it and science doesn't lead us to the conclusion that killing vegetables is okay. As human beings, it's within our nature to show compassion and sympathize with others and it has nothing to do with religion. Even in countries where gays are killed, I assure there are people who witness that who, even though their religion says that's how they must be punished, sympathize with those that are gay and get hung or pushed off of buildings.
Are you sure you're not religious? Your doctrine is basically one of a religious person. Might as well change your user to AbrahamicLaQueen. You basically have views on sex that mirror the extremist Muslims you hate. Social scientists strive to enter a post-gender society to end patriarchy while you use rigid views on gender rooted in 3rd-world takes on sex that mimic religious nonsense. Get. it. together.
This is what gets me. They are so passionate in their rejection of religion but cling to these ideas (there are only 2 genders, transphobia, anti-feminism) that have long since existed and been perpetuated in socially regressive religious cultures
This is what gets me. They are so passionate in their rejection of religion but cling to these ideas (there are only 2 genders, transphobia, anti-feminism) that have long since existed and been perpetuated in socially regressive religious cultures
Who's "they" ? Y'all are getting tiring real quick. If you have a problem with a specific member target the specific member and stop labeling the whole thread as alt-right or something. (That would actually imply you'd read the thread, and not randomly open it, read the first post you see and rant about it while assuming the whole thread is like that)
Either participate in this thread, or don't AT all. You're not being constructive.
You and LoKoPaNdA only open this thread to rant and when we ask what's wrong you'll only mention ONE post where ONE member posted ONE video you did not agree with. (or don't answer altogether)
Talk with us a bit more and make up your mind, but I'm not being called a person who believes there's only 2 genders, a transphobic person, or a anti-feminist. No ma'am !
