Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kairan Nierde on July 13, 2011 at 12:52am

::snort:: the 72 virgins is for devout muslims.  Although what use 72 virgin men would be, I've no idea.  Quite a lot of christians seem content to live without much ethical consideration once they have assured their slot in heaven.  I think they wear crosses because you wouldn't recognize them from their actions otherwise.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dustin on July 13, 2011 at 12:56am

Yeah cause when you have sex only once with them then they are no longer virgins so what's the fun in that?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on July 13, 2011 at 2:04am

Perhaps thats why there is so many of them?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on July 13, 2011 at 2:08am

I think Gandhi would agree with you, Kairan. Here is one of his quotes... a personal favorite of mine:

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Sassan K. on July 14, 2011 at 2:11am

Ghandi was not a good man either..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rick on July 13, 2011 at 2:02am

Interesting. I never considered that point before. I'm sure believers will have some bullshit answer for your reasnoing. I may have to throw this up on the christian boards and see what they come up with.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bernard on July 13, 2011 at 7:48am

More proof if proof were needed that many Christians never actually read the Bible. If I ever wanted to convert a compassionate Christian to atheism I woud suggest they read it cover to cover!

The bible is a book responsible for more slavery, rape, killing and lies throughout history than any other.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Peter on July 13, 2011 at 10:59am

Christian's cannot claim any morals. Morals existed before the bible was even written. (look at all the previous religions/empires that existed before it)

This isn't very interesting when the the person is already ignorant within the first sentence.

[edit: a simple source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCL63d66frs] <--- (Richard Dawkins)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Melody A. Rogers on July 13, 2011 at 12:36pm

I really don't think that any religion has deemed murder, rape and such wrong. The bible and other books are fariytale explainations for the world infused with natural morals and things that were obvious to people of the time.

We are born with an instinct to keep from harm and to keep others from harm. We naturally understand what upsets us and the people around us, so, stealing for example, will get us in trouble which is something we want to avoid by nature. If you were to scold your baby as a term of endearment and then cuddle it when it has done wrong, the baby will still respond negatively to scolding and positively to cuddling. A baby is going to cry when you hit it; why? because it hurts. An adult is going to hurt when it is hit as well, and for the most part, people do not want pain. We naturally do not want harm or confusion or disruption.

We naturally do not want to mistreat others unless we are at odds with them or if they interfere with our safety/comfort. The mistreatment of women, or men, would be a selfish inclination, but to specifically discriminate one gender is something we learn, from places like the bible. In ancient cultures, women were praised and looked at as life-providing wonders. They were not mistreated. As religions evolved, the idea that women were inferior to men came about. So, the mistreatment of women IS something we naturally look down upon as is rape and murder, because those cause people harm and sorrow and are destructive to our race.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Frank Hamilton on July 13, 2011 at 2:28pm

"“Atheist friends: tread carefully. When you claim superior "morality" to Christians, you are standing on moral and ethical ground carved out entirely by the Judeo-Christian God and worldview."

 

Not true!  Moral and ethical grounds predate the relatively new religion, Christianity, not recognized at the time of its inception as such.  The Judeo-Christian religion is a Johnny-come-lately, an incoherent hybridization of many antecedent religions and as much credence could be given to Roman, Greek or Hindu gods as Judeo-Christian ones as delusional influences on some ideas of "morality" today.

Morality is not a province of religion, remaining outside the dogma and dictates of any religious ideology, but a consensual agreement in a human community as to how to behave ethically to suit the preservation of that community.  It can be dishonestly said that basic human morality about slavery, (remember that slavery is absolved in the bible), women's rights (not found in the bible but quite the opposite) and war (the bible is rife with the tyrant-in-chief waging it and destroying multitudes) has anything to do with Christianity or a Judeo-Christian sadistic god.

Christian morality is a recent and inconsistent construct used by priests, preachers, scribes, politicians and others with fanatical stripes to control behavior, deny honest morality and retard society.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by anti_supernaturalist on July 13, 2011 at 3:06pm

Xian morality is a faith-based hangover
moral absolutes / religious morality / enforcement of morals

• Western atheists and theists alike operate on the very same narrow bandwidth of “knowledge”. The Big-3 Monster Theisms have polluted cultures for so long that their doctrines on human action (morality) block humane progress in public policy and impede cleansing the world of conceptual corruption like “sin” and “guilt”.

God is dead.  And so is xian morality. Any viewpoint soiled by lying god proxies -- priests, pastors, televangelists, rabbis, imams -- comes not from on high, but from religious institutions making claims for secular power based the god fiction. There is no "executive privilege" for God.

• Old King God was a sullen old sod:

“My morality is absolute; my religion creates morality; my morality must be enforced.”

Nonsense:
1. Xian “morality” is not moral at all -- it is pathologically antisocial.
2. There is no inherent relationship between religion and morals.
3. Confucian principles indicate a solely cultural basis of moral codes.

Jesus’ mores are antisocial, otherworldly, and impractical. He promises much, and delivers nothing. Jesus' "interim ethic" could not outlast one generation of true believers. After all, the world was about to end. But it didn’t. And “Jesus” will not be back, despite xian lies. (Sermon on the Mount -- search term: interim ethic)

The antisocial irrationality of Paul of Tarsus (fl. 50-65 CE) with its anti-intellectualism, misogyny, and revenge seeking has poisoned the West for 2,000 years. After all, the world was about to end -- but it didn’t. And, the hellenistic savior god “Christ” will not be back. No end-of-days starring comix character Christ-Cosmic-Avenger will ever happen.

• Five hundred years before historical fiction Jesus and hysterical Paul, Confucius was eons ahead of contemporary xian (jewish/islamist) thinking:

6:20 Fan Ch’ih asked what constituted wisdom. The Master said, “To give one’s self earnestly to the duties due to men, and, while respecting spiritual beings, to keep aloof from them, may be called wisdom.”

No relationship between religion, “spiritual beings” and morality, “the duties due to men.”

15:23 Tsze-kung asked, saying, “Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one’s life?” The Master said, “Is not 'reciprocity' such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.” (trans. S.R. McIntyre. Analects. 2003)

What follows? No religion police! No religious figure may dictate right human action. All morality is irreducibly social.

Why is deliberately killing a person (= an in-group member) murder? Harming others cannot be generalized; otherwise, no culture could exist.

the anti_supernaturalist

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by james d on July 13, 2011 at 4:59pm

excellent reply!

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page