@LiberalsUtopian Wrong, Atheism CAN'T be defined as hatred against God. Don't just make shit up! They don't hate God, they simply don't believe in God. It's impossible to hate something you don't believe in.
Misotheists hate God, Anti-theists often hate religion but, Atheists just don't believe.
People get angry when they talk to you because you believe & say stupid things. They get angry with you because you don't listen or think for yourself.
@MrLittletomdj No, atheists know that god exists but they hate god, so they denie that he exists.You see whats really going on is that the atheists states, "I am god," so that way there is no morality. That way the atheist can rationalize taking these steroids to cheat the swimming competition, or have unprotected sex with these prostitutes putting their spouse at risk for sexually transmitted disease.
@LiberalsUtopian Yeah because Noam Chomsky, Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagen, Richard Dawkins, Bruce Lee, Terry Pratchett, Eddie Vedder, Matt Dillahunty, Albert Einstein (the list goes on) all had/have loads of unprotected sex with hookers and were/are doped up on steroids 24/7! What a dumb statement you've just made! Morality is a contract between (and for the benefit of) social creatures. If morality was the unchanging Law Of God, we'd still have slavery & stoning(according to your doctrine/theology).
@MrLittletomdj Well I don’t think I agree with that. Clearly murderers did not sign any contract so how can you impose your morality on them? How can people who did not sign the contract be subject to contactarianism? I think your ethical theory is logically inconsistant.
@AEVautomatic By "contract" I was speaking figuratively. Obviously you have sociopaths in this world that don't adhere to the moral norms of society. In reaction society doesn't accept them & puts murderers and rapist in prison. The point is that it's society that instills moral values in you & judges you if you don't comply to the social rules. If you expect to reap the benefits of living in a society you must comply to the rules. Morality is subjective & relative, there is no absolute.
@MrLittletomdj “By "contract" I was speaking figuratively.”
So you didn’t mean to use the term “contract?”
“Society that instills moral values in you & judges you”
That doesn’t mean they are right. If the Nazis won the war and they instilled values on every one that the holocaust was moral does that make it moral? No they would simply be wrong
@AEVautomatic "social contract" I meant the term figuratively in that it is an understanding rather than a literal signed peice of documentation. There's a degree of flexibility for moralilty within societies. The point at which something is deemed immoral by society is ill defined.
I mean morality is subjective to the individual but those values are largely instilled in the individual by the culture which they belong to.
@AEVautomatic . If we were honest, well informed & base our morality on evidence without prejudice, it might be possible to achieve a legal system which is uncorrupted by the selfish agendas of the ruling classes. If the system was fair, then the law could be a more accurate reflection of the moral values of the people. Popular oppinion doesn't always penetrate the the law & the media often spread misinformation which influence pop' oppinion. The criminalization of pot is a good example of this.
@MrLittletomdj “If we were honest, well informed & base our morality on evidence without prejudice”
So, morality then is based on reason and not relative to the culture. That would certainly be my view, that morality is based on reason, and therefore objective.
@AEVautomatic Morality is really just a complex evolution of empathy & empathy is just survival mechnanism of self aware social creatures like man. Empathy is not a product of reasoned logic, it's closer to being an instinctive sense. Our capacity to reason is grounded on the the information we are given. Whilst I agree morality is largely based on reason, it also forms from an emotional disposition to circumstances.
This is to assume the standard of “fair” is good. If morality is subjective then it’s not contrary to reason that they should want the justice system to be unfair.
@AEVautomatic Y'know this is an interesting debate but, you've just fired out 5 responses in a row... I responded to one, not realizing how many comments you just made.. I would be happy to switch to a PM conversation, because so far you don't sound like a nutter. =D... I can't make my points clear with the old 500 character limit impeding the process. (if you agree I'll send you a proper message, oh and please read the first response too!!)
@AEVautomatic By "fair" I simply mean "with each participant having equal influence". This has nothing to do with right or wrong, it is just an expression of a balanced system.
@AEVautomatic Are you getting hung up on the word "contract"(as I said, that was meant figuratively)? Morality is entirely subjective. I decide what I consider to be moral, just as you decide what you consider to be moral. We are taught our moral barings from societies influence & our own personal experience. I'm not sure what your stance is on this issue though. 2 questions;
a) Do you believe morality is dictated by God?
b) Do you believe it is immoral to smoke cannabis?
@AEVautomatic The criminalization of pot is an example where agendas of corporations have influenced media into propergating misinformation. The media has created a fear of a relatively harmless drug. I'm convinced smoking pot is totally moral (subjective). A large percentage of my culture feel the same way. Well informed & unbiased people tend to agree. My point was not establish what is moral or not it was to establish that law doesn't reflect cultural morality in all cases.
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstien was a christian theist. So was Stephen Hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a crossdresser. And wasn't noam chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by some people he was working with? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways.a contract? So the nazi final solution contract was moral? you racist.
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstien was a christian theist. So was Stephen Hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a crossdresser. And wasn't noam chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by some people he was working with? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways.a contract? So the nazi final solution contract was moral? you racist.
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstein was a Christian theist. So was Stephen hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a cross dresser. And wasn't Noam Chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by coworkers? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways. A contract? So the Nazi final solution contract was moral? Typical atheist racism.
@MrLittletomdj Wow you are such an angry and racist atheist. See yu deny god so then you can say racismis moral. You are an atheist because of your hate for people based on their skin color.
@MrLittletomdj !" Morality is a contract between (and for the benefit of) social creatures. If morality was the unchanging Law Of God, we'd still have slavery & stoning"
Because what you are really saying here is that morality is relative to cultures. So you are by default saying that the holocaust was moral since that was their culture at the time. So you are very racist.
@LiberalsUtopian Hitler was a Roman Catholic & the vast majority of Nazi Germany were Christian. Yes morality is relative to cultures. The holocaust is immoral relative to my culture & my subjective morality. I suspect many Germans also thought that what they were doing was beneath thier moral standard. Just because I'm able to understand something I don't agree with doesn't make me racist.
Racism=the belief that inherent traits are due to race alone - I said nothing of the sort!
I don’t believe in moral absolutes either but that doesn’t make me a relativist.
“The holocaust is immoral relative to my culture & my subjective morality.”
That doesn’t logically follow from your premises. You said that a society decides what is morally right. If Nazi cultural kills 6 million Jews then that is moral according to you. To say they are immoral to you is contradictory.
@AEVautomatic "You said that a society decides what is morally right."
I didn't say that, what I said was society will judge individuals based on a general collective agreement of what is moral. You don't have to accept that status quo but, you will find yourself at odds with society if you don't. The idea of right and wrong is purely abstract. If the Germans had won, peoples view on the matter would probably be entirely different. It's an uncomfortable concept but that's not to say it's untue.
But your social contract says that morality is based on nothing and the social contract imposing their subjective morality on others is moral. So thats why your theory says slavery can be good.
The social contract is based on a mutually beneficial agreement for the individual's survival within a society. When it is deemed that actions of an individual are detremental to the well being of members within a society the populus judges those actions to be immoral. Slavery can be beneficial for the slave drivers but never for the slaves. Morality is an evolution of empathy. Objectively there is no right & wrong unless there is an objective pupose to life.
I am Christian and yes I believe in God but some of the things in the bible...I just do not agree with. Also the witch trails was Lunacy! Innocent people were killed because someone didn't like them and decided to call them a witch. And then there is the KKK....disgusting bunch of fools.
I'm torn about Gay marriage...I believe they should have something. I don't hate Gay people I grew up in a neighborhood that had gay people in it. See look at Harold Camping and his followers they went too far with May 21st bunk and it is harmful! A mother slit her throat and her daughters because she believed the world will end on May 21st. There was a man that hung himself in a church another was a girl that slit her wrists. You are right religion can be harmful.
Uh, I researched your arguments and you obviously don't do enough research.
For example, Daniel Houser's mom used religion as an excuse AFTER Daniel's first round of Chemotherapy. Second, Proposition 8 is the protection of gay marriage, proposition 22 is the ban of gay marriage.
1) It's irrelevant to the point WHEN she made the appeal to religious value; it's only important that she did.
2) "Proposition 8" does NOT protect gay marriage; it was a constitutional amendment to insert language explicitly defining marriage as between a man and a woman... precluding same sex marriage. How one could interpret that as a defense of gay marriage is beyond me.
Okay, I misresearched the second argument, you're right. The point of the video I'm okay with. But the Daniel Houser one was flawed, but yes you're right about the point that faith "can be" bad. Did she get rid of the video, because I can't find it.
@RobTheMonk8 Okay, I messed up on the Proposition 8 part, you're right. But you're right about the point that faith "can be" bad. Here's my question and give me your honest opinion. What if gay people decided strait people's rights to get married and it worked, would the theists learn what it's like? Why?
I think it's unfair to prohibit behavior that doesn't harm anyone unwillingly; it doesn't matter who is doing the deciding and whose rights are being eroded. I suspect the theists would learn, but by way of the wrong lesson.
@RobTheMonk8 Me too, but to be honest I don't think they'd really learn.
Here's a perfect example of what faith "can" do. There was this policy that wouldn't allow posters about politics, religion, etc. The school made an exception for religion because some Christian asked and when some Pagans took advantage of that, the Christians threw a fit.
you do have good points i will admit that as far as gay marriage goes regardless if they are religious or otherwise yes people can have those beliefs do you have to agree no but if you want to convince people insults are not helpful faith in God can be bad but it can be good it isnt faith or not faith that makes a person good or bad its the person that can make either of those things bad
You're not very good at this whole "being offensive" thing, are you? You might want to give up on it and try, I dunno, suicide? Somehow I imagine you won't be able to fuck that up as badly, but I'm not gonna put money on it.
Grammar: "Oh, you are gay. Well, I think you're free to suck as many dicks as you want. Now we can be friends- yay!" Commas, apostrophes, and full stops- you see? Now, try again, dipshit. I simply CANNOT be offended by someone who can't form a sentence.
@RobTheMonk8 your focusing on my grammar because tho im being insulting to get my point across i am right you are angry at my statements because im insulting which is my point if you want to make a good point insults can be distracting and counterproductive you no longer see my point because your so angry with me your points are good but your to hostile for most to see i did form sentences you did read them and responded you understood
Oh, you had a point? What, hidden somewhere in the three dozen syllables I've had from you since you started? So, what was your point, then?
I couldn't be less angry with you; you are insubstantial, inconsequential, utterly unimportant to me, as I no doubt am to you... one of us, however, thinks one of us values the other's opinion.
@RobTheMonk8 yes i did have a point it is that insulting is counterproductive and maybe your not angry with me but you did focus more on off topics because i insulted you and of course we are unimportant to each other im not sure what your point is now and i know you dont value my opinions why would you you dont know me but if some one insults you you cant have an intelligent conversation and thats what you do in this video
the whole kimo therapy thing about us christian not believing in that.......huh!???? now that's a surprise to me......i mean i'm christian and if i had cancer, YES I WOULD TAKE KIMO THERAPY if it's going to help me. I think it's scientific Christians that are like that who dont take medicine.
That was a good example of the carpet with the hole underneath. I think it would require the same faith for someone to walk over the carpet assuming that there really isn't a hole as the person not walking on it because they assume that there is one. A skeptic would lift the carpet up to find out, if they gave a shit in the first place.
Many people have the wrong concept of what it is to be open-minded. They think believing bullshit is being open-minded.
The whole "why are atheists angry?" is a disingenuous question. I've noticed religious theists will ask it if you are venting (which makes the question unnecessary) or they will ask it after they provoke anger (threatening you with damnation or telling you you're not worthy of being human or a citizen).
They say the bible says everyone knows God, so they think atheists arent real atheists and are just mad at God. They can't substantiate this argument so they try to invent substantiation by inciting anger in atheists.
i'm not sure if it's still in place in all these states, but there are/were 8 of them that wouldn't let us Atheist hold a public office, give testimony in court, or serve on a jury, also, 60% of male infants are being genitally mutilated for religious, and to be fair, cultural reasons,
I might be unreasonably frustrated by the removal of the original video. Obviously I didnt see it: for all I know it was a devastatingly eloquent, insightful argument that would show me the error of my godless, baby-eating ways but... well, surely "Artist. I, Chic" realizes that by taking the video down it seems as though even SHE is unable to stand by her statements?
All she had to do was ignore the Atheist Scum and leave the video up for context/posteritys sake. Is that too much to ask?
Honestly, I am not sure how to answer that. If you are treating "infinite" in this case as a quantity- something like "an infinite NUMBER of apples-" then the problem is with your definition of infinity. If you permit that time is, in principle, always further divisible- then "Yes." If not, then the answer is contingent upon whether time carries on without boundary. Basically, I need to know more about what you meant in order to answer you.
HEY! That was WAY out of line! FAR to reasonable and coherent for a response to a theist!
BTW- being open minded does not mean you accept everything, just that you don't dismiss it outright...you evaluate it first. You sound EXTREMELY open minded.
Haha, I see. Well, I am definitely interested in hearing it. I can't recall (and I'm to lazy to confirm) whether I said "no argument" or "no GOOD argument," but the latter is, of course, what I meant. While "good" might seem superfluous and arbitrary, I take it to mean, among other things, that the argument points unambiguously to the conclusion... all of the secular arguments I've encountered are merely arguments against marriage in general.
Starting at 3:35 you say "there is no secular argument, count 'em, zero secular arguments for banning gay marriage."
But there is a secular argument. Marriages are given financial subsidies based on the idea that marriages will result in propogating society and assuring there will be parents to raise the children and therefore a growing, healty society.
Gay marriages can not result in children, therefore should not (as the argument goes) be given the same benefits.
Yeah, I've heard that one. Not a good argument. 1) the financial subsidies point presupposes that gay marriage is somehow detrimental to the claimed objective. It isn't. Gays will be gay without or without "subsidies." Their inability to reproduce is quite apart from whether or not they're married. 2) The argument would seem to suggest that infertile couples, elderly couples, and couples using birth control or condoms should be prevented from marrying. You see how this argument falls apart?
I mean, another secular "argument" against gay marriage is "I just don't like fags." This "argument" doesn't invoke God or religious values, but it's still utterly craptastic. I should've said "good" but I thought that "reasonable, sound arguments" could just be taken as implicit. Ultimately, if the financial "burden" that gay-marriage would have on taxpayers is too great, why isn't the "burden" of hetero couples?
I'm not saying it is a good argument. I'm just correcting your staement when you said "there is no secular argument, count 'em, zero secular arguments for banning gay marriage."
Sure, the major argument is the morality. But, there is at least one secualr argument (even if it is not a good one).
But it's hardly a correction when even untenable, vacuous arguments count, is it? I mean, by that reasoning, there are "arguments" which support the sky being red and 1+1 totaling to 3. If the argument is also an argument for prohibiting things people universally accept, then the argument fails. Completely.
Well, no successful argument. As I say in my response to SamiZataar, the success of an argument will be contingent upon what is being proved and whether or not the argument points unamibiguously toward that conclusion (or if ambiguities can be eliminated by further argument). The absence of a functional definition of God is, in my opinion, the most crippling aspect of deism.
I expect that she's not going to hear anything in what you said except her preconceived determination of all the "hateful" things you said. Such is the way of disequilibrium.
This video is too angry to watch for more than a minute.
LiberalsUtopian 6 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Atheists are angry only when they speak to people like you. You invoke thier anger.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj No they all already angry. Atheism can be defined as hatred against god it is rage.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Wrong, Atheism CAN'T be defined as hatred against God. Don't just make shit up! They don't hate God, they simply don't believe in God. It's impossible to hate something you don't believe in.
Misotheists hate God, Anti-theists often hate religion but, Atheists just don't believe.
People get angry when they talk to you because you believe & say stupid things. They get angry with you because you don't listen or think for yourself.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj No, atheists know that god exists but they hate god, so they denie that he exists.You see whats really going on is that the atheists states, "I am god," so that way there is no morality. That way the atheist can rationalize taking these steroids to cheat the swimming competition, or have unprotected sex with these prostitutes putting their spouse at risk for sexually transmitted disease.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Yeah because Noam Chomsky, Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagen, Richard Dawkins, Bruce Lee, Terry Pratchett, Eddie Vedder, Matt Dillahunty, Albert Einstein (the list goes on) all had/have loads of unprotected sex with hookers and were/are doped up on steroids 24/7! What a dumb statement you've just made! Morality is a contract between (and for the benefit of) social creatures. If morality was the unchanging Law Of God, we'd still have slavery & stoning(according to your doctrine/theology).
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Well I don’t think I agree with that. Clearly murderers did not sign any contract so how can you impose your morality on them? How can people who did not sign the contract be subject to contactarianism? I think your ethical theory is logically inconsistant.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic By "contract" I was speaking figuratively. Obviously you have sociopaths in this world that don't adhere to the moral norms of society. In reaction society doesn't accept them & puts murderers and rapist in prison. The point is that it's society that instills moral values in you & judges you if you don't comply to the social rules. If you expect to reap the benefits of living in a society you must comply to the rules. Morality is subjective & relative, there is no absolute.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj “By "contract" I was speaking figuratively.”
So you didn’t mean to use the term “contract?”
“Society that instills moral values in you & judges you”
That doesn’t mean they are right. If the Nazis won the war and they instilled values on every one that the holocaust was moral does that make it moral? No they would simply be wrong
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj “If you expect to reap the benefits of living in a society you must comply to the rules.”
So you did mean a social contract. I thought that term was used “figuratively”.
“Morality is subjective & relative”
Do you mean subjective to the individual or to the culture? Because you had previously stated that you are a cultural relativist.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic "social contract" I meant the term figuratively in that it is an understanding rather than a literal signed peice of documentation. There's a degree of flexibility for moralilty within societies. The point at which something is deemed immoral by society is ill defined.
I mean morality is subjective to the individual but those values are largely instilled in the individual by the culture which they belong to.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Your argument boils down to illegal= immoral. Just like when it was illegal to be black or a jew.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic . If we were honest, well informed & base our morality on evidence without prejudice, it might be possible to achieve a legal system which is uncorrupted by the selfish agendas of the ruling classes. If the system was fair, then the law could be a more accurate reflection of the moral values of the people. Popular oppinion doesn't always penetrate the the law & the media often spread misinformation which influence pop' oppinion. The criminalization of pot is a good example of this.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj “If we were honest, well informed & base our morality on evidence without prejudice”
So, morality then is based on reason and not relative to the culture. That would certainly be my view, that morality is based on reason, and therefore objective.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic Morality is really just a complex evolution of empathy & empathy is just survival mechnanism of self aware social creatures like man. Empathy is not a product of reasoned logic, it's closer to being an instinctive sense. Our capacity to reason is grounded on the the information we are given. Whilst I agree morality is largely based on reason, it also forms from an emotional disposition to circumstances.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj “If the system was fair”
This is to assume the standard of “fair” is good. If morality is subjective then it’s not contrary to reason that they should want the justice system to be unfair.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic Y'know this is an interesting debate but, you've just fired out 5 responses in a row... I responded to one, not realizing how many comments you just made.. I would be happy to switch to a PM conversation, because so far you don't sound like a nutter. =D... I can't make my points clear with the old 500 character limit impeding the process. (if you agree I'll send you a proper message, oh and please read the first response too!!)
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic By "fair" I simply mean "with each participant having equal influence". This has nothing to do with right or wrong, it is just an expression of a balanced system.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj “The criminalization of pot”
Is a good example of how the social contract doesn’t decide what is moral nor does the subjective opinion of individuals or cultures
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AEVautomatic Are you getting hung up on the word "contract"(as I said, that was meant figuratively)? Morality is entirely subjective. I decide what I consider to be moral, just as you decide what you consider to be moral. We are taught our moral barings from societies influence & our own personal experience. I'm not sure what your stance is on this issue though. 2 questions;
a) Do you believe morality is dictated by God?
b) Do you believe it is immoral to smoke cannabis?
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic The criminalization of pot is an example where agendas of corporations have influenced media into propergating misinformation. The media has created a fear of a relatively harmless drug. I'm convinced smoking pot is totally moral (subjective). A large percentage of my culture feel the same way. Well informed & unbiased people tend to agree. My point was not establish what is moral or not it was to establish that law doesn't reflect cultural morality in all cases.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstien was a christian theist. So was Stephen Hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a crossdresser. And wasn't noam chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by some people he was working with? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways.a contract? So the nazi final solution contract was moral? you racist.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstien was a christian theist. So was Stephen Hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a crossdresser. And wasn't noam chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by some people he was working with? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways.a contract? So the nazi final solution contract was moral? you racist.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Did you honestly just call Steven Hawkin a retard? FUCK YOU!
"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions." - Einstien
"I have repeatedly said the idea of a personal God is a child like one" - Einstien
"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit preist I am and always have been an Athiest" - Einstien
At best he was a skeptic!
Chomsky - Peodophile = BULLSHIT
Dillahunty - Crossdresser = LOL!!
You're a twisted little fuck!
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Albert Einstein was a Christian theist. So was Stephen hawking but after Hawking went retarded he converted to an atheist because he is full of rage against god. Matt Dillihunty is a cross dresser. And wasn't Noam Chomsky caught having sex with underage boys by coworkers? As you can see they had to claim there was no god so they can say there is no morality to justify their sickening ways. A contract? So the Nazi final solution contract was moral? Typical atheist racism.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Wow you are such an angry and racist atheist. See yu deny god so then you can say racismis moral. You are an atheist because of your hate for people based on their skin color.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Was that a joke??? Are you fucking mental? wtf has this got to do with race?
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj !" Morality is a contract between (and for the benefit of) social creatures. If morality was the unchanging Law Of God, we'd still have slavery & stoning"
Because what you are really saying here is that morality is relative to cultures. So you are by default saying that the holocaust was moral since that was their culture at the time. So you are very racist.
LiberalsUtopian 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@LiberalsUtopian Hitler was a Roman Catholic & the vast majority of Nazi Germany were Christian. Yes morality is relative to cultures. The holocaust is immoral relative to my culture & my subjective morality. I suspect many Germans also thought that what they were doing was beneath thier moral standard. Just because I'm able to understand something I don't agree with doesn't make me racist.
Racism=the belief that inherent traits are due to race alone - I said nothing of the sort!
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj There is no absolute.”
I don’t believe in moral absolutes either but that doesn’t make me a relativist.
“The holocaust is immoral relative to my culture & my subjective morality.”
That doesn’t logically follow from your premises. You said that a society decides what is morally right. If Nazi cultural kills 6 million Jews then that is moral according to you. To say they are immoral to you is contradictory.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic "You said that a society decides what is morally right."
I didn't say that, what I said was society will judge individuals based on a general collective agreement of what is moral. You don't have to accept that status quo but, you will find yourself at odds with society if you don't. The idea of right and wrong is purely abstract. If the Germans had won, peoples view on the matter would probably be entirely different. It's an uncomfortable concept but that's not to say it's untue.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
But your social contract says that morality is based on nothing and the social contract imposing their subjective morality on others is moral. So thats why your theory says slavery can be good.
AEVautomatic 5 months ago
@AEVautomatic LAST ONE.. phew...
The social contract is based on a mutually beneficial agreement for the individual's survival within a society. When it is deemed that actions of an individual are detremental to the well being of members within a society the populus judges those actions to be immoral. Slavery can be beneficial for the slave drivers but never for the slaves. Morality is an evolution of empathy. Objectively there is no right & wrong unless there is an objective pupose to life.
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
Religion is bull shit!! People made it up to control people. Just watch George calling. That is so funny.
tredub91 8 months ago
I am Christian and yes I believe in God but some of the things in the bible...I just do not agree with. Also the witch trails was Lunacy! Innocent people were killed because someone didn't like them and decided to call them a witch. And then there is the KKK....disgusting bunch of fools.
AtelierRoronagirl 8 months ago
I'm torn about Gay marriage...I believe they should have something. I don't hate Gay people I grew up in a neighborhood that had gay people in it. See look at Harold Camping and his followers they went too far with May 21st bunk and it is harmful! A mother slit her throat and her daughters because she believed the world will end on May 21st. There was a man that hung himself in a church another was a girl that slit her wrists. You are right religion can be harmful.
AtelierRoronagirl 8 months ago
Seriously, I dont want everyone to """just get along"" if that includes not following evidence, having irassional beliefs or being stupid.
gulbirk 8 months ago
Uh, I researched your arguments and you obviously don't do enough research.
For example, Daniel Houser's mom used religion as an excuse AFTER Daniel's first round of Chemotherapy. Second, Proposition 8 is the protection of gay marriage, proposition 22 is the ban of gay marriage.
H377H0UND 1 year ago
@H377H0UND
1) It's irrelevant to the point WHEN she made the appeal to religious value; it's only important that she did.
2) "Proposition 8" does NOT protect gay marriage; it was a constitutional amendment to insert language explicitly defining marriage as between a man and a woman... precluding same sex marriage. How one could interpret that as a defense of gay marriage is beyond me.
RobTheMonk8 1 year ago
Okay, I misresearched the second argument, you're right. The point of the video I'm okay with. But the Daniel Houser one was flawed, but yes you're right about the point that faith "can be" bad. Did she get rid of the video, because I can't find it.
H377H0UND 1 year ago
@RobTheMonk8 Okay, I messed up on the Proposition 8 part, you're right. But you're right about the point that faith "can be" bad. Here's my question and give me your honest opinion. What if gay people decided strait people's rights to get married and it worked, would the theists learn what it's like? Why?
H377H0UND 1 year ago
@H377H0UND
I think it's unfair to prohibit behavior that doesn't harm anyone unwillingly; it doesn't matter who is doing the deciding and whose rights are being eroded. I suspect the theists would learn, but by way of the wrong lesson.
RobTheMonk8 1 year ago
@RobTheMonk8 Me too, but to be honest I don't think they'd really learn.
Here's a perfect example of what faith "can" do. There was this policy that wouldn't allow posters about politics, religion, etc. The school made an exception for religion because some Christian asked and when some Pagans took advantage of that, the Christians threw a fit.
H377H0UND 1 year ago
you do have good points i will admit that as far as gay marriage goes regardless if they are religious or otherwise yes people can have those beliefs do you have to agree no but if you want to convince people insults are not helpful faith in God can be bad but it can be good it isnt faith or not faith that makes a person good or bad its the person that can make either of those things bad
prettybabs25 1 year ago
it affects u r u gay
prettybabs25 1 year ago
@prettybabs25
it affects ur grammar
RobTheMonk8 1 year ago
@RobTheMonk8 oh you are gay well i think your free to suck as many dicks as you want now we can be friends yay
prettybabs25 1 year ago
@prettybabs25
You're not very good at this whole "being offensive" thing, are you? You might want to give up on it and try, I dunno, suicide? Somehow I imagine you won't be able to fuck that up as badly, but I'm not gonna put money on it.
Grammar: "Oh, you are gay. Well, I think you're free to suck as many dicks as you want. Now we can be friends- yay!" Commas, apostrophes, and full stops- you see? Now, try again, dipshit. I simply CANNOT be offended by someone who can't form a sentence.
RobTheMonk8 1 year ago
@RobTheMonk8 your focusing on my grammar because tho im being insulting to get my point across i am right you are angry at my statements because im insulting which is my point if you want to make a good point insults can be distracting and counterproductive you no longer see my point because your so angry with me your points are good but your to hostile for most to see i did form sentences you did read them and responded you understood
prettybabs25 1 year ago
@prettybabs25
Oh, you had a point? What, hidden somewhere in the three dozen syllables I've had from you since you started? So, what was your point, then?
I couldn't be less angry with you; you are insubstantial, inconsequential, utterly unimportant to me, as I no doubt am to you... one of us, however, thinks one of us values the other's opinion.
RobTheMonk8 1 year ago
@RobTheMonk8 yes i did have a point it is that insulting is counterproductive and maybe your not angry with me but you did focus more on off topics because i insulted you and of course we are unimportant to each other im not sure what your point is now and i know you dont value my opinions why would you you dont know me but if some one insults you you cant have an intelligent conversation and thats what you do in this video
prettybabs25 1 year ago
Pretty good job man... Good arguments
tracelight24 1 year ago
Her account is gone it looks like..
pokerslut530 2 years ago
You definitely are underviewed.
sidchuownz 2 years ago
the whole kimo therapy thing about us christian not believing in that.......huh!???? now that's a surprise to me......i mean i'm christian and if i had cancer, YES I WOULD TAKE KIMO THERAPY if it's going to help me. I think it's scientific Christians that are like that who dont take medicine.
dreamillusions84 2 years ago
That was a good example of the carpet with the hole underneath. I think it would require the same faith for someone to walk over the carpet assuming that there really isn't a hole as the person not walking on it because they assume that there is one. A skeptic would lift the carpet up to find out, if they gave a shit in the first place.
Many people have the wrong concept of what it is to be open-minded. They think believing bullshit is being open-minded.
covega79 2 years ago
not all faith is bad but all faith is more or less blind.
rubixxcube 2 years ago
The whole "why are atheists angry?" is a disingenuous question. I've noticed religious theists will ask it if you are venting (which makes the question unnecessary) or they will ask it after they provoke anger (threatening you with damnation or telling you you're not worthy of being human or a citizen).
albatross1977 2 years ago
They say the bible says everyone knows God, so they think atheists arent real atheists and are just mad at God. They can't substantiate this argument so they try to invent substantiation by inciting anger in atheists.
albatross1977 2 years ago
i'm not sure if it's still in place in all these states, but there are/were 8 of them that wouldn't let us Atheist hold a public office, give testimony in court, or serve on a jury, also, 60% of male infants are being genitally mutilated for religious, and to be fair, cultural reasons,
AnUglyAmerican 2 years ago
I might be unreasonably frustrated by the removal of the original video. Obviously I didnt see it: for all I know it was a devastatingly eloquent, insightful argument that would show me the error of my godless, baby-eating ways but... well, surely "Artist. I, Chic" realizes that by taking the video down it seems as though even SHE is unable to stand by her statements?
All she had to do was ignore the Atheist Scum and leave the video up for context/posteritys sake. Is that too much to ask?
Sproggit7 2 years ago
Er, obviously I mean "Atheist Scum" in the loveliest possible way, Rob.
Sproggit7 2 years ago
Oh, and I of course took it in the loveliest way :D
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
Very handsome. I'd hit that. ;D
f0repl4y 2 years ago
I'll send you my address :D
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
I'll see you tonight then.
haha.
f0repl4y 2 years ago
I usually give wrong directions on purpose xD it's funny as hell
annatar3 2 years ago
It's so hard to stay a calm Atheist when religion is in your face everyday and everywhere.
yo1o2eggs 2 years ago
Especially when it restricts your daily life and your rights!
towelempire 2 years ago
Can an ACTUALLY infinite string of events exist??
friendlydiplomat 2 years ago
Honestly, I am not sure how to answer that. If you are treating "infinite" in this case as a quantity- something like "an infinite NUMBER of apples-" then the problem is with your definition of infinity. If you permit that time is, in principle, always further divisible- then "Yes." If not, then the answer is contingent upon whether time carries on without boundary. Basically, I need to know more about what you meant in order to answer you.
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
And what does this have to do with the video?
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
HEY! That was WAY out of line! FAR to reasonable and coherent for a response to a theist!
BTW- being open minded does not mean you accept everything, just that you don't dismiss it outright...you evaluate it first. You sound EXTREMELY open minded.
blurglide 2 years ago
cant make a comment
KletosApostolos 2 years ago
Irony?
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
lol. Actually, I had been trying to comment for 5 minutes and it wouldn't work. I was attempting you expain a secular argument against gay marriage.
KletosApostolos 2 years ago
Haha, I see. Well, I am definitely interested in hearing it. I can't recall (and I'm to lazy to confirm) whether I said "no argument" or "no GOOD argument," but the latter is, of course, what I meant. While "good" might seem superfluous and arbitrary, I take it to mean, among other things, that the argument points unambiguously to the conclusion... all of the secular arguments I've encountered are merely arguments against marriage in general.
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
Starting at 3:35 you say "there is no secular argument, count 'em, zero secular arguments for banning gay marriage."
But there is a secular argument. Marriages are given financial subsidies based on the idea that marriages will result in propogating society and assuring there will be parents to raise the children and therefore a growing, healty society.
Gay marriages can not result in children, therefore should not (as the argument goes) be given the same benefits.
KletosApostolos 2 years ago
Yeah, I've heard that one. Not a good argument. 1) the financial subsidies point presupposes that gay marriage is somehow detrimental to the claimed objective. It isn't. Gays will be gay without or without "subsidies." Their inability to reproduce is quite apart from whether or not they're married. 2) The argument would seem to suggest that infertile couples, elderly couples, and couples using birth control or condoms should be prevented from marrying. You see how this argument falls apart?
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
I mean, another secular "argument" against gay marriage is "I just don't like fags." This "argument" doesn't invoke God or religious values, but it's still utterly craptastic. I should've said "good" but I thought that "reasonable, sound arguments" could just be taken as implicit. Ultimately, if the financial "burden" that gay-marriage would have on taxpayers is too great, why isn't the "burden" of hetero couples?
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
I'm not saying it is a good argument. I'm just correcting your staement when you said "there is no secular argument, count 'em, zero secular arguments for banning gay marriage."
Sure, the major argument is the morality. But, there is at least one secualr argument (even if it is not a good one).
~peace
KletosApostolos 2 years ago
But it's hardly a correction when even untenable, vacuous arguments count, is it? I mean, by that reasoning, there are "arguments" which support the sky being red and 1+1 totaling to 3. If the argument is also an argument for prohibiting things people universally accept, then the argument fails. Completely.
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
"But it's hardly a correction when even untenable, vacuous arguments count, is it?"
So, do you also hold that there are no arguments for the existence of god? They're all vacuous. :P
MotionFur 2 years ago
Well, no successful argument. As I say in my response to SamiZataar, the success of an argument will be contingent upon what is being proved and whether or not the argument points unamibiguously toward that conclusion (or if ambiguities can be eliminated by further argument). The absence of a functional definition of God is, in my opinion, the most crippling aspect of deism.
RobTheMonk8 2 years ago
I guess she isn't open minded, she took her video down.
justintempler 2 years ago
Great stuff, Rob.
imbalancingact 2 years ago
You're so militant!
;)
Very, very reasoned response. BUT...
I expect that she's not going to hear anything in what you said except her preconceived determination of all the "hateful" things you said. Such is the way of disequilibrium.
dfarmer1584 2 years ago 2