All Atheists are Immoral

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

religion was created by man to establish an effective tool for teaching morality - it's still one of the best tools around for that purpose

Man-made laws and jails are also good tools for teaching morality, and similar to certain religions in that they teach "morality" based on fear of punishment.

But hey, that's better than no morality at all.

I'm going to give you flowers when I meet you. You get it.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

I'm going to give you flowers when I meet you.

Cool. I prefer the thorny kind.

[rehmwa 2]

"How does lightening work?"

long time ago - {{shit, I don't know, I herd sheep and collect filth and just want to live another day}} - "er, the gods hurl it down. Can't you see that? Like you kids tossing a rock down"


today - blah, blah, blah, electric potentials, blah, blah, blah,



religious beliefs on scientific issues I just consider a placeholder until the real reasons are discovered and proven. In that, "god" just = "Unknown for now". I guess It's a good way for scientists to decide what to work on.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

"How does lightening work?"

long time ago - {{shit, I don't know, I herd sheep and collect filth and just want to live another day}} - "er, the gods hurl it down. Can't you see that? Like you kids tossing a rock down"

Exactly my point.

It's originally about explanation of the unknown, not morality.






IMO.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

"How does lightening work?"

long time ago - {{shit, I don't know, I herd sheep and collect filth and just want to live another day}} - "er, the gods hurl it down. Can't you see that? Like you kids tossing a rock down"

Exactly my point.

It's originally about explanation of the unknown, not morality.

"Dad, what happens if I steal from the neighbors"
"Er, then the gods will hurl a lightening bolt on your butt. So don't steal. Now go collect some nice filth"

"Why did cousin die after eating that old pork"
"Because he was bad and let in the demons - he was punished for his bad thoughts and actions. So don't eat the bad meat and be good to your friends"


hint: the 'unknown' and 'morality' are very intimately related.......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

"Dad, what happens if I steal from the neighbors"

"Er, then the gods will hurl a lightening bolt on your but. So don't steal. Now go collect some nice filth"

That comes after.

First you have the concept of the big guy in the sky, then some other dude comes along and tags the morality onto it.

Look at the earliest religions and how they stopped the gods from pissing on them. Did they do it by being all nice and happy to each other? Or did they do it by cutting the heads off a few sheep (and humans) and having a ruddy great booze up?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

It wasn't just about explaining the unknown. The really smart ones leveraged the unknown for their own purposes. I don't think there was a "before" and "then after". They were uneducated, not stupid.

some purposes good - to explain morality as they see it
some purposes evil - to party it up and get the girls
some purposes result in evil because they think they were doing good (out of fear) - throw the virgin in the volcano

each to his own tendencies

It was neither good nor bad, just depended on the individuals that recognized the leverage was there and used it.

same as today

fear of a volcano vs fear of a volcano-god - doesn't much matter much to the virgin

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

It wasn't just about explaining the unknown. The really smart ones leveraged the unknown for their own purposes. I don't think there was a "before" and "then after". They were uneducated, not stupid.

some purposes good - to explain morality as they see it
some purposes evil - to party it up and get the girls
some purposes result in evil because they think they were doing good (out of fear) - throw the virgin in the volcano

each to his own tendencies

It was neither good nor bad, just depended on the individuals that recognized the leverage was there and used it.

same as today

So first you say you're being less cynical, and now you say religious belief was being exploited from before there were even proper religions?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So first you say you're being less cynical, and now you say religious belief was being exploited from before there were even proper religions?

but, I said people exploit a power structure. Not that the ONLY application of religion was (negative or self serving) exploitation - which was the initial sentiment I disagreed with. Religion also has very positive ways to exploit which are disregarded by the close minded.

the other answer is - yes, and we got a decent discussion from it rather than the 'off the cuff' initial statement which was rather religious in its absolute presentation


neither one of us is proposing Dave's original sentiment in any way - isn't that enlightening?



so, I'm saying human nature is the same today as then really.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[pajarito 0]

Quote

I thought that Peter was the rock.

Quote

Jesus, who knew the heart of Peter, was not saying that Peter, the movable stone, would be the immovable rock upon which the Church would be built. Rather, it would be built upon Jesus and it was this truth that Peter had affirmed what he said to Jesus, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," (Matt. 16:16). This is consistent with scripture elsewhere where the term rock is sometimes used in reference of God, but never of a man.

Quote

For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 3:11

***Deut. 32:3 - "The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice."

1 Sam. 22:2 - "The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; 3 My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge."

Psalm 18:31 - "And who is a rock, except our God."

Isaiah 44:8 - "Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."

Rom. 9:33 - "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and he who believes in Him will not be disappointed."

Is Peter the rock on which the Church is built?

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

neither one of us is proposing Dave's original sentiment in any way - isn't that enlightening?

Wait - who's Dave?

The whole issue could swing on this point.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

Cool. I prefer the thorny kind.

Well, then I'm your...oh wait...you said thorny...never mind.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Quote

I'm going to give you flowers when I meet you.

Cool. I prefer the thorny kind.

Screw the roses, give me the thorns?

Remster

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Screw the roses

Leave it to you to be screwing roses. I don't even want to hear about what other sick things you're in to. (But you can send me pictures if you want to. )

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

While it may give greater knowledge of the subject (technically, I suppose that's teaching), it seems to have little, if any, effect on implementation.

I'll disagree with you there, Dave. One has to look at people in general, not just those examples that stick one's craw. (I know you are thinking of the leadership, televangelists, all the hypocrits, but not your coworkers, your neighbors, the average Joe....)

In particular, look at the effect on kids, especially in lower education or poor areas. There's actually a lot to be said for the "Santa Claus" effect and upbringing.

Edit: So, you are in a bad neighborhood. You turn a corner and see on left, a couple teenagers, they have their WWJD (IMO) pins on, their parents walk the talk, they go to religious school, they have discussions all the time about right and wrong, and the consequences of it all as part of their upbringing.

On the right, a couple teenagers, they spend their weekends getting into trouble, mom and dad say one thing and do another, they play video games and hear discussions all the time about moral subjectiveness.

Which side of the road to you walk down? Which kids are "likely" to be decent kids?

You kind of spoiled the well with the question by stating that two of the kids spend weekends getting into trouble, thus they are already established as less likely to be decent kids.

My point was that the WWJD kids have the advantage of parents who are trying to raise their children properly. Religion doesn't make them more or less likely to be good parents. I spent most of my childhood in church and there were some incredibly immoral people there, including some who affected me very personally. When I left that part of my life behind and moved in with an atheist aunt and uncle, I found myself surrounded by people with a profound sense of right and wrong and the courage to let it direct their actions. Do I think atheism is what made them moral? Of course not. Correlation does not equal causation, and the sample size is negligible. There are trashy parents of both the atheist and religious ilk, and good parents who disagree on the existence of a god. Since atheists are a minority in our society, it stands to reason that they would also be a minority of good parents.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[okalb 104]

Quote

Which side of the road to you walk down? Which kids are "likely" to be decent kids?

Clearly you don't know how these things work

You walk down the side with the bad kids. Kick the biggest one's ass and the others all run away. You then claim the block as your own. The next step is to convince the good kids across the street how much money that can make "working" for you. Enough to take care of their whole family. They start selling drugs for you. When they screw up, you make them get their sisters to work the street for you in order to save the brothers skin. Now you are the king, got people selling drugs for you. You got you some Ho's working the street. You move up to the next block and start the whole process over again.

Of course, you can only do this if you are an atheist because you clearly have no morals

Time flies like an arrow....fruit flies like a banana

[unformed 0]

Who would you rather marry?

A man/woman who won't cheat on you because she truly loves you.

Or...

A man/woman who won't cheat on you because she's worried about going to hell.

This ad space for sale.

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

In particular, look at the effect on kids, especially in lower education or poor areas. There's actually a lot to be said for the "Santa Claus" effect and upbringing.

Edit: So, you are in a bad neighborhood. You turn a corner and see on left, a couple teenagers, they have their WWJD ([Crazy]IMO) pins on, their parents walk the talk, they go to religious school, they have discussions all the time about right and wrong, and the consequences of it all as part of their upbringing.

On the right, a couple teenagers, they spend their weekends getting into trouble, mom and dad say one thing and do another, they play video games and hear discussions all the time about moral subjectiveness.

As Dave points out, you've already poisoned your example by saying that the religious kids come from a 'good' family, and that the non-religious kids are lazy juvenile delinquents. Poor form

Now, your example is based on an old argument - you are walking through a bad neighborhood at night when you see a group of large youths walking towards you. Do you feel better or worse knowing that they've just come from a bible study group?

Of course, counter arguments abound. Would you feel better or worse knowing that they'd come from any book group? Night school? On a different tack, what if you are gay and they've just come from a southern fundamentalist group? You are female, uncovered, and they've just come from a hardcore mosque?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Who would you rather marry?

A man/woman......

talk about spoiling the well - I don't think I'd marry a hermaphrodite. I really like women.

Not that there's anything wrong with hermaphrodites. If you're into that.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Which side of the road to you walk down? Which kids are "likely" to be decent kids?

Clearly you don't know how these things work ...........
Of course, you can only do this if you are an atheist because you clearly have no morals

You win -

I got the answers I was looking for - essentially what I've been saying.

1 - people are people one way or the other
2 - religion can be a personal force for good, or an excuse to exploit. It's not "religion" that does it, it's individuals that have those inclinations. (Dave's response on this was excellent and highlighted a bit of both)

therefore, I still don't understand the active vitriol towards "religion", particularly Christianity. If it wasn't around, something equivalent would take it's place.

So I suspect, it's more of an issue with the people that gripe about it needing a PC axe to grind. That's cool.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Butters 0]

Quote

therefore, I still don't understand the active vitriol towards "religion", particularly Christianity.

It is particularly against Christianity because Christianity is the dominant religion in America.

You live in a mall where people are trying to sell X, Y, and Z. The majority of people are trying to sell X. You don't believe you need X and don't want to buy X. All you want to do is watch the water fountain. However, the people trying to sell X constantly tell you that you need X (and if you don't buy X something bad will happen). Eventually you grow tired of people constantly attempting to sell you something. In particular, people trying to sell you X.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Royd 0]

Quote

You live in a mall where people are trying to sell X, Y, and Z. The majority of people are trying to sell X. You don't believe you need X and don't want to buy X. All you want to do is watch the water fountain. However, the people trying to sell X constantly tell you that you need X (and if you don't buy X something bad will happen). Eventually you grow tired of people constantly attempting to sell you something. In particular, people trying to sell you X.

I'll bet when you walk through the food court, you're scarfing down the free samples of Bourbon Chicken.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

therefore, I still don't understand the active vitriol towards "religion", particularly Christianity.

It is particularly against Christianity because Christianity is the dominant religion in America.

You live in a mall where people are trying to sell X, Y, and Z. The majority of people are trying to sell X. You don't believe you need X and don't want to buy X. All you want to do is watch the water fountain. However, the people trying to sell X constantly tell you that you need X (and if you don't buy X something bad will happen). Eventually you grow tired of people constantly attempting to sell you something. In particular, people trying to sell you X.

By that rationale, a lot of people should have the same level of animousity against domestic beers and American made trucks.

[Butters 0]

Quote

By that rationale, a lot of people should have the same level of animousity against domestic beers and American made trucks.

The difference is domestic beers and American made trucks don't tell you that you will suffer for eternity if you don't buy them.

Edit: They tell you that you will suffer temporarily if you don't buy them.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

By that rationale, a lot of people should have the same level of animousity against domestic beers

Lots of people do have animosity against big domestic beers!

Animousity?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?