RenegadeCJ wrote: The atheists I know are less moral only in that there is really no moral "right or wrong". Every act is basically down to does it hurt me somehow, or maybe hurt someone else. One atheist's wrong might be perfectly fine to another atheist. Christians have a specific right/wrong code, although we fail and cross that line just as much as those who are atheist.
I just love generalizations about atheists...I could sit and watch 'em for hours....
This statement is hilarious. As if this fine individual doesn't make generalizations about Christians, conservatives, white men, and every other group she despises. Hypocriteous Maximus.
But... but... but she's a enlightened progressive... it's allowed.
Sigh. It's not that it's allowed because anyone is a "progressive", it's because no one wanted to have generalized insults moved to the Ring, only personal insults - no matter which side they came from. As I
said before
, we can keep taking general insults as personal insults, crying victim, and using it as an excuse to further our own bad behavior...or we can stop taking things personally, stop stereotyping and generalizing about others, and start being proactive and putting people on Ignore or
dealing with them in an effective way.
RenegadeCJ wrote:
Science Chic wrote: No, it doesn't (that was my subtly ironic tone of writing) Crime does correlate more directly with poverty than religion, it makes me chuckle when religious fundamentalists try to use that as an argument that atheists are less moral (and, therefore, more prone to criminal behavior).
The atheists I know are less moral only in that there is really no moral "right or wrong". Every act is basically down to does it hurt me somehow, or maybe hurt someone else. One atheist's wrong might be perfectly fine to another atheist. Christians have a specific right/wrong code, although we fail and cross that line just as much as those who are atheist.
Renegade, I'm going to call you on this, or need further clarification. The very definition of moral has nothing to do with spirituality/religiosity, only right and wrong ethical behavior. You do not have to be religious to know right from wrong, nor to choose to do right because as you say, it's about doing no harm to the other person. I'm not sure what you mean by "Christians have a right/wrong code" so I'm hoping you can explain more - to me that's just another way of saying morally right and wrong, but I may be missing something. Thanks!
Definition of MORAL
1
a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical <moral judgments>
b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a moral poem>
c : conforming to a standard of right behavior
d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment <a moral obligation>
e : capable of right and wrong action <a moral agent>
2
: probable though not proved : virtual <a moral certainty>
3
: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect <a moral victory> <moral support>
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Last edit: 23 Jan 2017 13:25 by MyMountainTown. Reason: fixed broken links
RenegadeCJ wrote: The atheists I know are less moral only in that there is really no moral "right or wrong". Every act is basically down to does it hurt me somehow, or maybe hurt someone else. One atheist's wrong might be perfectly fine to another atheist. Christians have a specific right/wrong code, although we fail and cross that line just as much as those who are atheist.
Renegade, I'm going to call you on this, or need further clarification. The very definition of moral has nothing to do with spirituality/religiosity, only right and wrong ethical behavior. You do not have to be religious to know right from wrong, nor to choose to do right because as you say, it's about doing no harm to the other person. I'm not sure what you mean by "Christians have a right/wrong code" so I'm hoping you can explain more - to me that's just another way of saying morally right and wrong, but I may be missing something. Thanks!
That is my point. For an atheist, who sets the code? The Atheist does (unless there is some book of "moral code" for atheists I'm unaware of lol ) For Christians, and other religions, the code is already set by their belief, and their guide, which in a Christian's case, is the Bible.
I'm not insinuating Atheists are immoral. I know a few who are extremely moral...lot more that a lot of Christians are. What you believe doesn't affect your morality, unless you actually follow thru.
Too bad future generations aren't here to see all the great things we are spending their $$ on!!
Surveyed dated 2004, almost 10 years have past.......AND the WORST financial crisis since the Great Depression......wonder just how
the numbers have changed (if at all)?
The graph seems to indicate ONLY a RELIGIOUS spread sheet.......the "word" spiritual is briefly mentioned ONCE in the first paragraph
of text........would be VERY interesting to see the break down of "spiritual"/religious..... :readp:
RenegadeCJ wrote: That is my point. For an atheist, who sets the code? The Atheist does (unless there is some book of "moral code" for atheists I'm unaware of lol ) For Christians, and other religions, the code is already set by their belief, and their guide, which in a Christian's case, is the Bible.
I'm not insinuating Atheists are immoral. I know a few who are extremely moral...lot more that a lot of Christians are. What you believe doesn't affect your morality, unless you actually follow thru.
They set the code themselves, which I would argue makes it more likely for them to follow it through than imposed rules from a supposed "moral authority" (whom have been proven time and again to be as human and fallible as the rest of us). As Albert Einstein said, "If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." I also don't think that the Bible, nor the Quran, for two prominent examples, have good "codes" to many parts of them, so if an individual is picking and choosing which parts to adhere to or not, then how are they different than an atheist who picks and chooses what level of "Do no harm" they follow?
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Science Chic wrote: They set the code themselves, which I would argue makes it more likely for them to follow it through than imposed rules from a supposed "moral authority" (whom have been proven time and again to be as human and fallible as the rest of us). As Albert Einstein said, "If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." I also don't think that the Bible, nor the Quran, for two prominent examples, have good "codes" to many parts of them, so if an individual is picking and choosing which parts to adhere to or not, then how are they different than an atheist who picks and chooses what level of "Do no harm" they follow?
The moral authority is the Bible. The Holy Spirit is the prompter. The "code" from the Bible is the new testament. What in the new testament has what you consider to not be good "codes"?
And I fully agree with you. Atheists follow their code quite well, because most of us tend to follow our own rules. Regarding Einstein...we are a sorry lot.
Too bad future generations aren't here to see all the great things we are spending their $$ on!!
And you are welcome to believe that. However, it doesn't mean that you are right; it doesn't mean that you have the right to judge anyone else by their acceptance or non-acceptance of your particular flavor of superstition; and you don't have the right to try to prevent others from living a life that is NOT based on your particular interpretation of your particular brand of superstition...
The bible may be YOUR "moral authority"... To me it is a not-terribly-interesting collection of superstitions written by people who didn't understand what eclipses were; what causes tornadoes, floods and hurricanes; and didn't have a clue what comets were; and that celestial mechanics mean that Earth is not the "center of the universe"; and that it's no more likely that the Earth was created in 6 calendar days, than my Aunt Bessie is a Martian....
LadyJazzer wrote: And you are welcome to believe that. However, it doesn't mean that you are right; it doesn't mean that you have the right to judge anyone else by their acceptance or non-acceptance of your particular brand of superstition; and you don't have the right to try to prevent others from living a life that is not based on your particular interpretation of your particular brand of superstition...
The bible may be YOUR "moral authority"... To me it is a not-terribly interesting collection of superstitions written by people who didn't understand what eclipses were; what causes tornadoes, floods and hurricanes; and didn't have a clue what comets were; and that celestial mechanics mean that Earth is not the "center of the universe"; and that it's no more likely that the Earth was created in 6 calendar days, than my Aunt Bessie is a Martian....
Because you would never pre-judge because of someone's party membership?
Or accept your own moral code based on a party platform? Where you anti-gay marriage when Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
So, Clinton signed DOMA to keep the right-wingers from going for a Constitutional Amendment... Was I happy?...Not particularly... Do I understand why? Yep... Is it time to shove DOMA down the throats of the bigots (on both sides) and get rid of an unconstitutional law?... You betcha...
The very definition of moral has nothing to do with spirituality/religiosity, only right and wrong ethical behavior. You do not have to be religious to know right from wrong, nor to choose to do right because as you say, it's about doing no harm to the other person. I'm not sure what you mean by "Christians have a right/wrong code" so I'm hoping you can explain more - to me that's just another way of saying morally right and wrong, but I may be missing something. Thanks!Crime does correlate more directly with poverty than religion, it makes me chuckle when religious fundamentalists try to use that as an argument that atheists are less moral (and, therefore, more prone to criminal behavior).
