10 years in jail and 2,000 lashes for tweeting that he was an atheist

[Kaleb5000]

As I've explained, it's entirely biological. I suppose morals exist in that sense, but they are subjective.

So Morals are based on feelings and not in facts or ones experiences?

If my morals say your morals are wrong, which one os us is right?

   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GSOgymrat]

It is disheartening that the US is allied with a government like Saudi Arabia.

[Kaleb5000]

An emotional response does not always equal a moral one.

I see two different ways of defining morals:emotionally; and rationally. They seem to take turns preceding each other. That is, sometimes I feel something is wrong, before I reason why. Other times, I have to think it over first. But you have to understand that all of that "thinking it over," is a biological process as well.

Morality comes from other people. It comes from our parents and teachers, as well as our friends and enemies, and all our direct experience with the world. When we learn the golden rule, morality moves from strictly emotional to something rational.

I compare my morality, to the morality of others, and find more similarity than difference. Even in the various self-contradicting holy books I can find examples of the golden rule, along side the many overt deviations from that principle.

That's why codification of morality has to be free to grow, as our consciousness of others expands. Free from static dogma. When you proclaim that God wrote your holy book, you lock into whatever mistakes that are in it, and you can't adapt as you learn from experience.

  I agree that our Morals can be influenced by the people you come into contact with. This does not mean they are right though. There still had to be a source of what is morally good.

  Things like not murdering someone or stealing.


  You care to point out any contradictions in the bible?

"Thinking it over" is not biological. Where do our thoughts come from?  Where is our mind in our body?

I do not believe morality needs room to grow. It is a never changing standard. When we start changing what is morally acceptable we open the door to all kinds of things.

 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Baruch]

You imagine we have a morality gene? I seriously doubt it. Because we would all have the same morals or we all are seriously mutated. It's not that we are mutated we are sinful and self seeking.  We measure our level of evilness against what is Good (God)


  Annnnnnnd attack me hahaha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If there is a morality gene, and some people lack it ... that would be bad.  Then we can screen for bad people and terminate pregnancies we don't like.  Like theists hoping there is a god gene, so that all the atheists can be aborted before they create any damage.

[Baruch]

  I agree that our Morals can be influenced by the people you come into contact with. This does not mean they are right though. There still had to be a source of what is morally good.

  Things like not murdering someone or stealing.


  You care to point out any contradictions in the bible?

"Thinking it over" is not biological. Where do our thoughts come from?  Where is our mind in our body?

I do not believe morality needs room to grow. It is a never changing standard. When we start changing what is morally acceptable we open the door to all kinds of things.

 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Murder is perfectly moral.  If you have a time machine, you are Republican, and your target is baby Hitler ;-)

[Kaleb5000]

If there is a morality gene, and some people lack it ... that would be bad.  Then we can screen for bad people and terminate pregnancies we don't like.  Like theists hoping there is a god gene, so that all the atheists can be aborted before they create any damage.

No I would still be against abortion even if I knew you were going to be the outcome lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kaleb5000]

Murder is perfectly moral.  If you have a time machine, you are Republican, and your target is baby Hitler ;-)

We don't have time machines. There is no such thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DeltaEpsilon]

So Morals are based on feelings and not in facts or ones experiences?

If my morals say your morals are wrong, which one os us is right?

   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

None of them are fucking right! Morals are right or wrong, they're SUBJECTIVE! They're a biological instinct, in our primitive era they kept us alive.

[Kaleb5000]

None of them are fucking right! Morals are right or wrong, they're SUBJECTIVE! They're a biological instinct, in our primitive era they kept us alive.

What brought you to this conclusion? Your feelings? I would argue some people's ideas of morals kept some people dead not alive.

Morals are objective how people choose to view morals is subjective.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mike Cl]

Doesn't being a atheist require much more faith then anything else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, being atheist requires no faith.  Or belief.  There is no god; and there is not a shred of evidence that there is.  I don't have 'faith' in that statement; I have reasons to think that it is true.  I think --actually, know--that it is true.  One must have faith and belief for your god to exist; it is a fiction, pure and simple. 

[Kaleb5000]

Actually, being atheist requires no faith.  Or belief.  There is no god; and there is not a shred of evidence that there is.  I don't have 'faith' in that statement; I have reasons to think that it is true.  I think --actually, know--that it is true.  One must have faith and belief for your god to exist; it is a fiction, pure and simple.

Creation is evidence. For one to say there is no God they would have to have tremendous faith. Because there is no proof God doesn't exist. So you either have faith or you know everything. Which is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike Cl]

Creation is evidence. For one to say there is no God they would have to have tremendous faith. Because there is no proof God doesn't exist. So you either have faith or you know everything. Which is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Creation is evidence of one thing--material stuff is in the universe.  It gives zero evidence of any god(s).  Science gives us a method to make statements (hypothesis) and then test them.  The results of those tests tell us if there is evidence to accept that statement as true or false.  And anybody can do the testing and can test as often as they like.  So far, there is no evidence for god.  God remains a fiction.  Therefore, I don't need any faith (the belief in something unseen or untrue); in fact I reject your faith as willful blindness--nothing more.  A 'man of faith' is simply one who chooses to remain blind and stupid. 

Proof that god does not exist--the absence of any evidence--zero evidence--is proof there is no god.  I don't have to prove the nonexistence of god, or Bugs Bunny, or Pecos Bill, or The Invisible Pink Unicorn, or fairies, or ogres, or trolls, or The Tooth Fairy, or any other fictional character.  They are clearly fictional characters.  If one believed they were real it would be their burden to prove their existence.  So, if you believe in god, what is your proof???? 

[Kaleb5000]

Creation is evidence of one thing--material stuff is in the universe.  It gives zero evidence of any god(s).  Science gives us a method to make statements (hypothesis) and then test them.  The results of those tests tell us if there is evidence to accept that statement as true or false.  And anybody can do the testing and can test as often as they like.  So far, there is no evidence for god.  God remains a fiction.  Therefore, I don't need any faith (the belief in something unseen or untrue); in fact I reject your faith as willful blindness--nothing more.  A 'man of faith' is simply one who chooses to remain blind and stupid. 

Proof that god does not exist--the absence of any evidence--zero evidence--is proof there is no god.  I don't have to prove the nonexistence of god, or Bugs Bunny, or Pecos Bill, or The Invisible Pink Unicorn, or fairies, or ogres, or trolls, or The Tooth Fairy, or any other fictional character.  They are clearly fictional characters.  If one believed they were real it would be their burden to prove their existence.  So, if you believe in god, what is your proof????

Proof?

  Creation is proof. How can something (the universe and everything in it) come from nothing. The complexity of all this points to a creator. Not just a matter of chance that every thing comes together perfectly. All of this had to come from something it did not just appear here.

Laws of nature that never change- must of been a designer of that. It's not by chance.

Objective morals

What kind of evidence would you expect to see from a timeless space less omnipresent, omnipotence, and omniscience God?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pr126]

Who created the creator?

[DeltaEpsilon]

What brought you to this conclusion? Your feelings? I would argue some people's ideas of morals kept some people dead not alive.

Morals are objective how people choose to view morals is subjective.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No, logic did. Yes, some people lack certain morals. Morals are not objective, if so, where do they come from? They're not logical, they only have a basis in biology.