Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is that MORE subjective than 6 billion people all living by their own preferences?
God defines what is "moral". He invented morality.
So according to you when God "allegedly" told people to go into a city to murder women and children (bashing babies heads against rocks)...this is moral?????
If that is what you're basing your morality on....I would gladly be immoral anyday!!!
12-13-2012, 02:43 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Sure I can, and have. Apply the golden rule and reverse-golden rule, and what do they say about murder and rape?
Well, since I neither want to be murdered nor raped, nor would I like to see that happen to my loved ones (and even people I don't know), it's safe to assume they are condemnable actions.
See how easy that is?
Yep! If moral actions have reasons as to why we should or should not do them then why not just appeal to the reasons and cut out the middle man (God) and go straight to the reasons themselves. Of course the Theist will say 'But how do you know?' Well, we apply reason, logic, biological undestanding, social understanding, etc. to arrive at our moral preference and those that work for the benifit of a social creature such as oursleves. But what about those outliers that nature has produced that think rape is good and just fine. Easy, the reason they are outliers is exactly because nature has told us what works, but nature is not a strick master - he optimizes by means of homeostasis. As such society will always enshine the mojority morality and keep in check those that waiver from it.
Interestingly, this is exactly what we see in REALITY. No God defending his absolute standards and this is why reality smacks in the face of the Theist's non-reality and why they invent theological and metaphysical justifications for their own subjective preferences like there was once a perfect world and there will be once again a perfect world and God will judge the world then but not now It's all to much and an epistemological nightmare for them to demonstrate that reality.
Invoking God as ones justification is just a philosophical and psychological mechanism in order to justify their own subjective preferences and sentiments and give the facade of 'objectivity.' They do nothing to establish this. They just absolutize their own self by extending it to a meta-being where they dump their own preferences and act as if it is someones elses - THE ALMIGHTY.... It's been at work now for at least 2,500 years of Western thought. Time to move back to reality!
But what about those outliers that nature has produced that think rape is good and just fine.
There is a problem with that.
In order for someone to think it's acceptable to rape, under the golden-reverse philosophy, they would have to want to be raped themselves. But such a thing is quite literally impossible, as it then becomes consensual, and rape, by definition, is not consensual.
At the risk of sounding glib, "You can't rape the willing."
12-13-2012, 04:13 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DentalFloss
There is a problem with that.
In order for someone to think it's acceptable to rape, under the golden-reverse philosophy, they would have to want to be raped themselves. But such a thing is quite literally impossible, as it then becomes consensual, and rape, by definition, is not consensual.
At the risk of sounding glib, "You can't rape the willing."
I know, it's granted for the theist who always point out some guy who doesn't give a crap or is mentally uncapable. The point is the majority keeps anything like that in check as well as is possible. Most criminals are just free riders navigating the system. In a society as large and complex as ours that is always a problem.
No. He told them to go execute them. There is a difference. Execution is not murder.
Chapter and verse please.
In 1 Samuel 15:3, God commands: Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.
Kill the nursing child? Now that's depraved. But kill the donkey, too? Not that it's worse than killing an infant, but... God's so upset that even slaughtering the babes isn't enough to slake his blood-lust, he wants the donkey killed, too? Someone needs a chill-pill!
The fictional lunatic of the Old Testament makes Darth Vader look like an amateur in comparison...
Of course, I'm sure we'll soon receive the 'context' that makes specifically targetting nursing babes for slaughter acceptable. Or the 'proper' translation.
[The scary thing is, when you're delusional enough to define moral as whatever that book says God approves of... well, that's from where much of the slaughter of history emanates]
1, Being uncreated doesn't make you objective, just purposeless.
2, murder with a excuse and an apology is just killing if there's no bad feelings, right? Or what is the difference to you?
3, I don't side with abusive, purposeless, immaterial alien beings, even if the Earth is their egotistical science experiment.
1. It makes you above the creation.
2. Not murder. Justice.
3. I don't either.
1. You could be above, beside, below, in between the lines... what does that mean when you are an uncreated purposeless ungrounded being? Aren't YOU above your creations? What rights and responsibilities does that give you?
2. So the difference between murder and killing is that killing is done with the excuses of revenge, fairness, and equality? Do you think killing babies JUSTLY is murder? what about UNBORN babies?
3. If you wouldn't side with such aliens in such circumstances... what is the difference between that and what the character YHWH is supposedly doing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth
Lets have a little exercise in thought. Imagine A purposeless evil demon as the first uncreated, immaterial, most powerful being... does everything that original Evil Demon say and do somehow become moral? The answer is no, just as the answer is Math and Morals don't come from an egotistical Demiurge.
Yes. If he's the standard of morality. You have no basis to judge him. Your opinion is no more valid than anyone else's. All you have is a preference.
So everything "Evil Demiurge" does is moral... because he's the standard of morality? Who says he's the standard of morality? That He came first? That's ridiculous, chronology means nothing. Worshiping this Titan is a foolish endeavor.
Why are you saying I have no basis to Judge this "Evil Demiurge"... I obviously do, which is why I am capable of judgement. That's like saying you have no basis to judge anything, and yet here you are judging about it all the way through.
Morality exists independent of the gods, morality simply IS... similar to math. I suppose if you really wanted to pretend like there are no bad things except because of God's existence, you could. But I'm pretty sure there is no need an Ancient Celestial Tyrant... why would anyone argue that their own suffering is what they want, merely because it is suffering?
I direct you to the book "On Moral Ends" by Cicero. De FinibusBonorum et Malorum
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 12-13-2012 at 07:01 PM..
In 1 Samuel 15:3, God commands: Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.
Kill the nursing child? Now that's depraved. But kill the donkey, too? Not that it's worse than killing an infant, but... God's so upset that even slaughtering the babes isn't enough to slake his blood-lust, he wants the donkey killed, too? Someone needs a chill-pill!
The fictional lunatic of the Old Testament makes Darth Vader look like an amateur in comparison...
Of course, I'm sure we'll soon receive the 'context' that makes specifically targetting nursing babes for slaughter acceptable. Or the 'proper' translation.
[The scary thing is, when you're delusional enough to define moral as whatever that book says God approves of... well, that's from where much of the slaughter of history emanates]
You know if God wanted Amalek attacked he could have just waved a hand or snapped a finger and it would have been done. His almighty self didn't need puny humans to do it. (Oh excuse me, his children) Sending his children to do his dirty work. Please. Somebody was trippin' on some kind of herb, cactus or drinking some pretty potent mead or wine and imagined or thought God was issuing such an order.
I wish his almighty self would appear before me and start barking out such nonsense. I got a few things I want to say to him anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Somebody was trippin' on some kind of herb, cactus or drinking some pretty potent mead or wine and imagined or thought God was issuing such an order. 
