I'm Catholic, let me have it!

[Plu]

Objective morals will never exist. Atheists don't get their morals from atheism, so that part of the question doesn't even make sense. If you want to compare catholic "morals" with other non-religious moral systems, that's fine but you'll have to decide which ones you want to discuss and then we'll have to see whether anyone here even ascribes to that moral system.

Ultimately though, the catholic church will slowly hop after the changes of morals in society as they have always done, but they'll fight it tooth and nail until they realise they've lost, and then they'll 180 on it and pretend it was part of their dogma all along.

[josephpalazzo]

In the midst of all this, let me propose a question. What is the opinion of either this community or these individuals on the objectivity of morality? I ask this because of a debate I saw between William Lane Craig, and Sam Harris. First of all let us get on the same page, let us speak in terms of modern day Catholicism (because it's MY question lol.) This is to avoid the mention of the westboro baptist church, and the ancient Church whose supposed evils are so often espoused here, and the modern day individual failings of a far too large number of priests. I wish to avoid these specific items because they are not part of the teaching of the Catholic Church even if they are directly related to Christianity or more specifically, Catholicism in some way. Does anyone here think that the teachings of the Church and the potential objectivity of atheistic morality will/can converge at some point? Even though their ideas on God won't.

Morality is a human construct. In many ways, it is nothing but the rules we agree upon to live in a society. In some way, it's like playing chess: you want to play it, you abide by the rules. It also means that the rules of morality are not written in stone: centuries ago slavery was moral - those who practiced it did not consider themselves immoral, neither their contemporaries. Today, there aren't too many places where it is still morally right to own slaves. How do we decide what is morally wrong? Often, it has to do with actions that harm others, or actions that impact negatively society as a whole. We have to remember we are both individuals and members of a society, so we need to regulate both aspects of ourselves. Now religion has basically highjacked morality to control the lives of people, making sure that its adherents don't stray away from its doctrine. So often that comes in conflict with those who don't adhere with that religion: think abortion and gay rights for which the RC church is at odds with secular society. All in all, morality is no more objective than the rules of chess: they only exist as ideas as long as that are humans who exist and hold these ideas in their mind.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

[Hijiri Byakuren]

What is the opinion of either this community or these individuals on the objectivity of morality?

Morality is a product of evolution and therefore subjective.

[Poison Tree]

You'd first have to tell us what you mean by "the objectivity of morality"--I suspect that you, like most Christians, actually (if unknowingly) mean "subjective and dependent on/to god".

as for your last question

Does anyone here think that the teachings of the Church and the potential objectivity of atheistic morality will/can converge at some point?

No. The only atheistic objective morality I'm aware of is the attempt by Harris. Since his morality is built on human suffering and Catholic/christian morality is built on the Nuremberg Defense (I was just following [god's] orders), I don't see how they could converge.

[Solitary]

That is hilarious! Solitary

[Mister Agenda]

Welcome Vercingetorix. Good luck. Christianity's main problem is that the God it worships probably doesn't exist, which would mean it's entire foundation rests on what fallible humans thought thousands of years ago.

[Mister Agenda]

My goodness... I didn't come here to troll. I take it you are all trolled very often, or are completely uninterested in entertaining any conversations like this. Perhaps there are many topics of this type on this site that I should have known about before starting this one. I am obviously sorry for having irritated anyone here. I would like to acknowledge (albeit with unfair brevity) the posts here that were intended to be welcoming, informational and friendly. Thanks all.     

You seem to have a good attitude.

[Mister Agenda]

It's certainly possible for Catholicism to reach a point where it shares enough premises with humanism to be largely in agreement (objectively) about what follows from those premises. I think humans should be as safe and free as possible. If we can agree on that, we should have some areas of agreement on what logically follows from that premise.

[Solomon Zorn]

Hello everyone, I am a cradle Catholic who fancies himself an apologist.

Hello V-X, I am a former Christian who fancies himself an uneducated hick.

I believe there IS a competent, intellectual way of thinking about/understanding the existence of a deity (especially the Christian one.)

I used to believe that as well. Try to start by defining “God”, or “deity” in a meaningful way, and go from there.

All I want to do is see if I can hold my own in an open forum... (I'm a lamb in search of a slaughterhouse.)

This is a good attitude. But what if you don't hold your own? Will you see that you didn't?

With that said, what is wrong with Christianity anyway? Is it anti-intellectual? Is it complete nonsense? Is it destructive? 

The armchair-psychologist in me has to ask if perhaps these are a list of your own complaints about Christianity? You seem to have nailed some of my top ones, when I still believed.

Are you indifferent to religion, or do you revile it?

I simply realize that it is not only unnecessary, it has been harmful to me in countless ways.

My goodness... I didn't come here to troll.

Don't worry about name-calling. Some of these guys are pretty jaded.

I take it you are all trolled very often, or are completely uninterested in entertaining any conversations like this. Perhaps there are many topics of this type on this site that I should have known about before starting this one. I am obviously sorry for having irritated anyone here.

Your contriteness is very Christian.

I would like to acknowledge (albeit with unfair brevity) the posts here that were intended to be welcoming, informational and friendly. Thanks all.

This one is intended as such. I find there is more interesting activity on these boards when we get a Christian. Otherwise it becomes a little cozy.

Welcome. I hope you will choose to stay a while.

[stromboli]

I apologize for the comments I made earlier. I misread your intentions.

You see religion from a Catholic point of view, we tend to see it from an overall view- religions are all false, and Catholicism is one of them. The religious see their beliefs as venerated and steeped in tradition, we see it as antiquated and outmoded. There is a concept called "God of the Gaps" created by Henry Drummond, a 19th century Evangelist, which postulated that religion existed where science failed or could provide no answers.

The problem with that concept is that the gaps keep shrinking. As science discovers more, religion becomes less true. God is an explanation for the unknown. And in the end, from a big picture standpoint, god had really provided nothing of substance to man. He has not demonstrably or reliably healed the sick, has not stopped a natural disaster, nor created the cures for diseases that ravaged the earth.

religions are creations of man that have become self serving institutions whose primary goal is maintaining their own existence. They do more harm than good in the world. Any justification for their existence is long past.

[rex]

What I hate about catholicism is.
The concept of sin.
Hell.
Heaven.
Constant surveillance and thought crime.
No option to cease to exist.
God who is watching how people get sick and die and torture one another and does nothing about it.
God who made world full of shit.
Also the salvation which is based on faith and not good works.
God who refuses to show himself.

[PickelledEggs]

I'm not the only one that doesn't get a troll vibe from Vercingetorix, am I? He's holding a discussion without asshole-ness. I think it's refreshing to have someone that is a theist that isn't a complete douche like we get trolls of and read about in the forum every day. It reminds me that not all people that believe in god aren't complete raging idiots.

[Johan]

Does anyone here think that the teachings of the Church and the potential objectivity of atheistic morality will/can converge at some point?

What exactly is atheistic morality?

[aitm]

What exactly is atheistic morality?

the same as "theirs" but using "our" love and compassion as the base instead of a magical "wizards" love and compassion. Pretty much semantics, only they are more than willing to kill you for not agreeing with them while you are more than willing to let them be.