|
Raven Gnosis
𝔰𝔢𝔯𝔭𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔠𝔦𝔡𝔞


Registered: 02/10/11
Posts: 1,311
Loc: Necoc Yaotl
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Almond Flour]
#19096988 - 11/06/13 06:49 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
This whole thread comes off as if the OP was drunk, watched this and made a thread about it.
-------------------- To be human is to be fettered, to endure what one is, in perpetuum, no matter what the debility or perversity.
|
Libertin
Absurdist


Registered: 10/07/09
Posts: 959
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Raven Gnosis]
#19099639 - 11/07/13 10:07 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
This is a question of morality. Sometimes theists ask atheists "If you don't believe in the divine word of God, as written in the [insert holy book here], then where do you get your morality?". What said theists need to realise is that there are two important distinct ways of making 'moral' decisions, and we don't need a holy book to help us with that.
- Rule-based morality - DO THIS, DON'T DO THAT. Rules, e.g. the ten commandments, law.
- Consequentialism - If the result of an action is positive, that action is OK. If it is harmful, that action is not OK.
Civilised societies use a combination of rule-based morality and consequentialism. If you break a law (rule) you may be summoned to court for judgements to be made against your actions, these judgements are often based on the consequences of your action. The judge or jury may decide that actually it was acceptable that you broke the law in this instance because nobody or nothing was harmed by your actions. A purely rule based morality is inflexible and demands punishment of people regardless of circumstances.
The inadequacy of strictly rule-based moralities is evident when we examine the argument of the people who claim 'God hates fags'. They claim that homosexuality is immoral because the bible says so. Well, the bible does condemn homosexuality but so what? What are the actual consequences of two men or women having sex? Perhaps an ancient repeatedly mistranslated book isn't the best source from which to make our decisions about what's acceptable.
|
GilbertC06
Omnipotent to a fault.


Registered: 01/29/13 
Posts: 597
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Libertin]
#19108719 - 11/09/13 01:24 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
This is by far the most retarded question about morality that I have ever seen
Quote:
This is a question of morality. Sometimes theists ask atheists "If you don't believe in the divine word of God, as written in the [insert holy book here], then where do you get your morality?". What said theists need to realise is that there are two important distinct ways of making 'moral' decisions, and we don't need a holy book to help us with that.
Rule-based morality - DO THIS, DON'T DO THAT. Rules, e.g. the ten commandments, law. Consequentialism - If the result of an action is positive, that action is OK. If it is harmful, that action is not OK.
Civilised societies use a combination of rule-based morality and consequentialism. If you break a law (rule) you may be summoned to court for judgements to be made against your actions, these judgements are often based on the consequences of your action. The judge or jury may decide that actually it was acceptable that you broke the law in this instance because nobody or nothing was harmed by your actions. A purely rule based morality is inflexible and demands punishment of people regardless of circumstances.
The inadequacy of strictly rule-based moralities is evident when we examine the argument of the people who claim 'God hates fags'. They claim that homosexuality is immoral because the bible says so. Well, the bible does condemn homosexuality but so what? What are the actual consequences of two men or women having sex? Perhaps an ancient repeatedly mistranslated book isn't the best source from which to make our decisions about what's acceptable.
^^ This guy has done his homework. Read it and weep OP.
|
Repertoire89
Cat



Registered: 11/15/12
Posts: 21,773
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Almond Flour]
#19108869 - 11/09/13 02:15 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
An interesting observation, in over 3 days OP has not responded to any rebuttals to his horrible thread. Don't think I'll forget this horrible thread OP, it will be preserved in the halls of posterity
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Repertoire89]
#19108970 - 11/09/13 03:31 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I am a left winger
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
Eric573

Registered: 07/22/13
Posts: 145
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: OK atheists and left wingers [Re: Ferdinando]
#19109018 - 11/09/13 04:23 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
What do you know about morality? You're just a monkey on a tiny ship in the cosmic ocean. However, I don't like hurting creatures. It doesn't make me feel good. Wasted opportunity for friendship. Now I don't know much about donkeys, but I will at least consider the possibility that they like to take it from the monkeys. Either way, does it matter? Hmmmmm maybe. Consider the possibility that it doesn't. I guess I don't buy into the idea that we're here to pursuit moral perfection.
-------------------- -Eric
|
|