|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 4422 days) Posts: 415 From: Australia Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Moral high ground | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4032 Joined: Member Rating: 9.2
|
And he thinks that he has the moral high ground Who needs to count deaths! Saying nothing whatsoever about Hooah's position... I think that murder carries just a smidge more moral weight than being a dick. In a consideration of the "moral high ground," if you consider manners to be anywhere remotely as important, even so close as to be worthy of mention in the same debate as things like genocide and torture, you need to re-evaluate your system of morals. I'd take Fred Phelps and his hatred-spewing posse over even a single murderer any day. He doesn't have the "high ground" over many people, but he can at least say he's not a murderer.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
C S writes:
Here we have two christians calmly expressing themselves to an assholish atheist who spouts nothing but vitriol. And he thinks that he has the moral high ground Maybe the following quotes from True Christians from the Hitch is Dead thread can show us some true moral high ground:
Dawn Bertot writes: He was a filthy piece of garbage and a piece of dung. Recieve that which you have reaped Mr Hitchens speaking of puerile dickheads, did you hear that Hitch died? Portilo writes:So like a cockroach, rat, bacteria or pondscum, Hitch did his job. Artemis writes:I am glad he is dead, fuck him. LOL the rationale of a dick sucking bitch like yourself. too funny. eat shit and die.
Maybe not. But on the assumption that two wrongs don't make a right, can we count the dead again? Or are we all agreed that it's an utterly facile activity?Life, don't talk to me about life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
I think that murder carries just a smidge more moral weight than being a dick. I doubt that jar and GDR have murdered anyone...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
can we count the dead again? Or are we all agreed that it's an utterly facile activity? I can, but apparently Rahvin thinks there's some merit to it. Too, why focus on the bad stuff? Can't looking at the good things religion has done push it towards the high ground?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Too, why focus on the bad stuff? Can't looking at the good things religion has done push it towards the high ground? Um ok count some of the good stuff religion has done i dare you to name 10 good things religion has done for humanity. Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Um ok count some of the good stuff religion has done i dare you to name 10 good things religion has done for humanity. Art, literature, music, charities, soup kitchens, hospitals, orphanages, YMCA, Habitat for Humanity, Salvation Army, World Relief. There, that's 11.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4032 Joined: Member Rating: 9.2 |
I doubt that jar and GDR have murdered anyone... Right, but this thread isn;t about the moral high ground of individual posters. You made a sarcastic snipe at Hooah about how he claims atheism to have the moral high ground, but he's being a dick. I was just calling out your bullshit, because dickishness isn't how we measure the moral superiority or inferiority of religious persuasions, given that far more important factors are in play. Hooah himself may or may not behave like a dick. Atheists in general may or may not behave like dicks. Regardless of which way that goes, it would say nothing at all regarding the moral superiority or inferiority of atheism as compared to other belief systems. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyway, on the actual topic: Personally I think a large portion of this topic is moot. Atheism doesn't have any tenets, no suggestions for moral or immoral conduct or rules governing ethical behavior. I don;t think atheism can be credited for any moral or immoral act because it makes no suggestions along how those should be defined. Suggesting that atheism bears responsibility for charity or for injustice would be akin to suggesting that the belief in the accuracy of the Theory of Gravity also bears similar levels of responsibility for moral or immoral action. It just doesn't make sense. The exception would be if someone were to show that moral behavior can only stem from belief in a deity (not just the existence of one, but belief in it, since an atheist could potentially exist in a world where deities exist). I think I can predict the course of that particular debate, should it occur. Christianity, on the other hand, is more than simple theism, it actually has a specific set of moral instructions. I think that to some degree Christianity can be credited with both the good and the evil that it inspires, since it actually contains moral suggestions to do the inspiring. Unfortunately I also think (and I'm sure many would agree) that the Bible is immensely contradictory on its moral suggestions, leaving the specific interpretation of Biblical morality up to the individual believer. The Bible tells us to love our neighbor...but to kill homosexuals or rebellious children. The Bible tells us not to kill or steal...unless God promised you some land that some nonbelievers are occupying. The end result is what we see - thousands of Christian denominations, many of whom have explicitly contradictory beliefs on morality whenever the Bible is either hazy or specifically contradictory. We have Christians who believe homosexuality is fine, and those who think it's a sin worthy of execution. We have Christians who believe in a woman's right to choose, and others who think if she chooses the "wrong" way she's a murderer. We have Christians who believe in charitable action, and those who think the poor deserve to suffer. I don't think that atheism can have any position at all on the "moral high ground" totem pole, since atheism does not suggest a system of morality. If an atheist gives to the poor, he's not doing it because he doesn;t believe in a deity; he's doing it because of his actual moral system, which of necessity must be independent from atheism. The only relevance to morality is that atheism precludes deity-based authoritarian moral systems, which is only one subset of all possible moral systems. I think that Christianity can bear moral responsibility, but that its confused and self-contradictory dogma inspires both great charity and horrific crimes against humanity. I can't say one is superior to the other, because one option can't be on the scale to be measured. It's like asking which is more wet, a fish or the number four. Now, if you wanted to compare actual moral systems, like the Ten Commandments authoritarianism vs humanistic preference utilitarianism, we might be able to have a debate.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Right, but this thread isn;t about the moral high ground of individual posters. You made a sarcastic snipe at Hooah about how he claims atheism to have the moral high ground, but he's being a dick. I was just calling out your bullshit, Well, you just misunderstood... I was saying that he thought that he, himself, had the moral high gound. Which is funny because he acts like such a dick.
Personally I think a large portion of this topic is moot. Me too.
Atheism doesn't have any tenets, no suggestions for moral or immoral conduct or rules governing ethical behavior. To be fair to Portillo, he did metion atheist regimes rather than just atheism.
Christianity, on the other hand, is more than simple theism, it actually has a specific set of moral instructions. I think that to some degree Christianity can be credited with both the good and the evil that it inspires, since it actually contains moral suggestions to do the inspiring. That's what I was saying earlier.
I can't say one is superior to the other, because one option can't be on the scale to be measured. It's like asking which is more wet, a fish or the number four. Its atheist regimes vs. religious atrocities:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4032 Joined: Member Rating: 9.2 |
To be fair to Portillo, he did metion atheist regimes rather than just atheism. To be fair to making any sense whatsoever, if "atheism" cannot bear moral responsibility, I fail to see how an "atheistic regime" might have any relevance, either. If the "atheism" part cannot bear moral responsibility, then it's irrelevant. One might as well discuss "regimes that happen to believe the sky is blue," or "regimes including a supreme leader who has the ability to drive a car." The structure of the comparison is set up to apply a judgment of morality on atheism by comparing the regimes that (may or may not) have been "atheistic" to those that (may or may not) have been primarily "Christian." But if we agree that "Atheism" says nothing about morality, then an "atheistic regime" can also say nothing about morality; it must be some other characteristic of those regimes that would drive them to good or evil, because atheism can do neither.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Well, the subliminal proposition is that because atheists don't believe in God they are not threatened by the afterlife (or lack of) and so have no reason not to follow their primal lusts.
We can rape and steal, lie and murder, pillage and slander without fear of reprisal by a vengeful god. Funny how we don't isn't it? You'd think that little piece of evidence - that we behave quite well considering - might carry a little weight, but for the idiots that believe it, it carries none. So we get inane threads like this. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Life, don't talk to me about life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 801 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Funny how we don't isn't it? You'd think that little piece of evidence - that we behave quite well considering - might carry a little weight, but for the idiots that believe it, it carries none. So we get inane threads like this. Well, their excuse is that god IS and stops us heathens from doing those things, regardless if we believe in it or not.Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Well, their excuse is that god IS and stops us heathens from doing those things, regardless if we believe in it or not. Woosh - there goes free will.......Life, don't talk to me about life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 801 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I suppose I worded that wrong. I should have said (instead of "stops us from doing those things") we get morals from god whether we acknowledge his existence or not, so I suppose that wording negates the free will argument.
Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 801 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Too, why focus on the bad stuff? When you have people who say "without god, there would be no morals/people would go around killing/if I didn't have jesus I would go around killing and raping", all you need to do is point out the atrocities in the name of religion and say "see, these people had jesus/god/whatever and still did bad shit" and that is enough to say that it matters not whether they believed in some god. In order for some group of people to claim the moral high ground, they have to actually be more moral as a whole than the group they claim to be more moral than. What you are saying would be like saying Jeffery Dahmer was a good guy because maybe one time he did something good. I really can see why it is hard for you guys to take off your rose coloured glasses and see your religion for what it truly is. What a life changing event it must be to admonish your fairy tale beliefs.Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
hooah writes: When you have people who say "without god, there would be no morals/people would go around killing/if I didn't have jesus I would go around killing and raping", all you need to do is point out the atrocities in the name of religion and say "see, these people had jesus/god/whatever and still did bad shit" and that is enough to say that it matters not whether they believed in some god. In order for some group of people to claim the moral high ground, they have to actually be more moral as a whole than the group they claim to be more moral than. What you are saying would be like saying Jeffery Dahmer was a good guy because maybe one time he did something good. I really can see why it is hard for you guys to take off your rose coloured glasses and see your religion for what it truly is. What a life changing event it must be to admonish your fairy tale beliefs. Ok, Hooah, let's do some comparisons. Group one: Regular Sunday go meetin fundi NT believers who pray regularly, read the Bible daily, work, attend religious functions often; i.e. your hated Biblio-fundies. Group two. Rabble rousing pleasure seeking, non-working ne-er go to church, ne-er read a Bible, bunny hopper sex practitioners of about any and all who one can entice, regular bar customers, pot smoking, street occupiers, infrequently home, etc. Group three: Shariah practicing, go-by-the Koran, Haddith & Sunnahs, majority in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, etc, Group four: Old Soviet Union leaders, police, atheistic minded military, politician, non church going, secularistic, etc. Group five. Secularist college student Group six: Mexican RRC oriented, non-Biblicalistic, city dweller Group seven: Wall Street Occupiers Group eight: Gay rightists seeking marriage perks, etc Group nine: Ultra liberal Democrats Group ten: RCC/Voodoo practicing Haitian etc. Group eleven. Folks who use vulgar and rough speech, cursing, etc. or folks who never curse, never practice what would be considered rough and vulgar speech. So on and so forth. Hooah, which one of these groups would have an equal or higher incidence of doing harm to someone, theft, murder, arrests, living in poverty, dependent on government perks, etc rather than providing for themselves, non productive, getting in scraps, fights, violent acts etc, etc? Pray tell, which, Hooah? BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future. Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024