|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: atheism | |||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: It really doesn`t matter what you think of rules in general bud, these are Percys boards and as such he, not you or I, gets to decide what a reasonable level of civility is.... He makes the rules for reason, to avoid the whole discussion sinking to the level that you reached earlier. IOW follow the rules or Percy may decide he doesn`t want you posting here.....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
quote: Aw, shucks, I had no idea that no one ever reads the guidelines. And after I put so much time and effort into them, too. The guidelines were put in place to prevent flame wars and keep discussion focused. Try it, you'll like it. --Percy (EvC Forum Administrator) PS - Enforcement begins with warnings (eg, this message), moves on to 24-hour suspension of posting privileges, and then longer periods if necessary.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
quote: I wasn't trying to invalidate christianity, just point out that christian faith isn't composed of universal morals. What has been morally acceptable has changed over time, and depends largely on the society in which you grow up ( my whole point about the incest issue is that at one time it was acceptable, but later it wasn't. This seems a change in morality to me.) Also, religious institutions , christian faiths among them, have misused the word of god to commit atrocious acts. While we can most probably agree, both the inquisition and the crusades were historical events that actually had political moves guised in religion. However, both had ardent supporters (both in of the cloth and not) who felt their heinous crimes were morally justified.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Member (Idle past 1509 days) Posts: 2161 From: Cambridgeshire, UK. Joined: |
quote: This is a valid point, and I'd ask (again) for a UNIVERSAL MORAL.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Sorry about how that message "sounded". I wasn't meaning to be snippy at you, just brief and to the point. Take all the time you need. Allison
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Well, you are the one who brought up the misuse of the ToE in order to discredit it, so I don't think you meant "nothing" by it. Ah, but there is a big difference between people misapplying a scientific theory for political ends and the use of Christianity to perpetrate the Crusades and the Inquisition. Using the ToE (or any theory) in this way is completely inappropriate because scientific theories are only meaningful and useful when one is doing science. IOW, in that narrow focus. These ideologues extrapolated far, far beyond what the evidence showed and inserted a great deal of their own philosophy into the theory where it was not AT ALL supported by any evidence. The Bible, OTOH, is meant to instruct us on moral and ethical behaviors. Obviously, a great many people, for a great many years, interpreted the Bible to mean that the Inquisition and the Crusades were GOD'S WILL and holy and wonderful acts. People who kill doctors and bomb Planned Parenthood clinics think they are doing God's work, too. The problem with Christianity is that it is not evidence-based, but relevatory, in nature. That means that anyone who interprets the Bible in a certain way, and who also gets a large enough group to agree with that interpretation, is going to have a lot of influence. Interpretation can obviously be wildly different depending upon the person and the circumstances, and this is why we have hundreds of Christian denominations. ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yes, but what does that have to do with Atheism, or your insistance that all thoughts are somehow equally valid when it comes to describing the natural world? I am not an Atheist, BTW.
quote: I’m sorry; I honestly don’t understand the question. [/b][/QUOTE] Let's drop this last point, as it's kind of a rhetorical question anyway. ------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth" [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-15-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Solid Snake Inactive Member |
quote: THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO SAY.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Cool. Glad I could be helpful.
------------------"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow- minded." -Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Solid Snake Inactive Member |
I ask anyone to prove that there are universal moarals shared by anyone.
You looking for a challenge Cobra? ------------------And with that he threw down his flaming sword, and gave God the finger. Since then it has been decreed that angels are hence forth not to consume alchohol.~~~Metetron the Voice of God (Alan Rickman)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cobra_snake Inactive Member |
I'm sure I could smear you in any REAL challenge.
However, there is no way for me to "prove" that there are universal morals, just like there is no way for you to "prove" that there are not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"I ask anyone to prove that there are universal moarals shared by anyone."
--Your allways going to have one culture or another or one person or another breaking one of the 10 commandments regularely, how is this relevant? ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
Take, thou shalt not kill. Now, this is a good solid moral. However, what happens when you consider self defense? If someone comes into your home and is going to kill you and your family, are you not justified, morally, in taking the life of that person to protect your family? Have you acted immorally? Should you have done nothing and merely accepted the death of your family because you refused to fight back? It is not always possible to avoid conflict.
The point is, that there are moral guidlines, common to most cultures, however, many are dependent on the situation and the society in which they occur. Seppeku, ritual suicide, was an acceptable and moral way in Japan to expunge one's shame. However, suicide is generally frowned upon by judeo-christian faiths. Of course, then what about terminal patients living in pain? Do they have the right to end their own suffering? Or must they suffer till their body gives out on them? I know this is a sticky moral issue, and it is one that is currently a source of controversy in the US. Its not clear cut.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
"Take, thou shalt not kill. Now, this is a good solid moral. However, what happens when you consider self defense? If someone comes into your home and is going to kill you and your family, are you not justified, morally, in taking the life of that person to protect your family? Have you acted immorally? Should you have done nothing and merely accepted the death of your family because you refused to fight back? It is not always possible to avoid conflict.
The point is, that there are moral guidlines, common to most cultures, however, many are dependent on the situation and the society in which they occur. Seppeku, ritual suicide, was an acceptable and moral way in Japan to expunge one's shame. However, suicide is generally frowned upon by judeo-christian faiths. Of course, then what about terminal patients living in pain? Do they have the right to end their own suffering? Or must they suffer till their body gives out on them? I know this is a sticky moral issue, and it is one that is currently a source of controversy in the US. Its not clear cut."--Yes this is true, though must you intentionally kill the intruder? Why not attempt to (lets assume you have a gun) shoot him in the stomach rather than the head? You must justify your intentions in this conflict. If your intention wasn't to kill him but to do what it takes to stop the conflict then you are fine and are in the line of defense. I would have to do research on what the bibles morals are on living in pain. ------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Yeah, those stupid rules about stopping at red lights while I'm driving. I think they are really dumb and useless. I don't think that we should have rules for driving anymore because it's so unfair.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024