Atheism = Moral Bankruptcy

The Paleocrat Tribune
http://thepaleocrat.com

Bada Boom! Bada Bing! The last video (for now) in my series of tirades against atheism.

The audio for this video was taken from a recent edition of Paleo Radio on WOCR 89.7FM in Olivet, MI.

HONORS THIS VIDEO HAS RECEIVED
41st Most Discussed Today
11th Most Discussed Today (News & Politics)
16th Most Discussed Week (News & Politics)

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• atheism
• Richard
• Dawkins
• Sam
• Harris
• Christopher
• Hitchens
• brian
• sapient
• rational
• responders
• relativity
• paleocrat

[Buddythunder1]

Very black and white world you live in, huh. Moral relativism does not leave us in the position of not being able to make moral distinctions between Hitler and an old granny, why would it? Quite a rant though.

[paleocrat]

@Buddythunder1 A lot of black and white, but plenty of different colors and various shades as well. We are talking about whether or not a standard or rule by which to use as a objective reference point for situational ethics exists. Admitting of such a standard's existence, giving a norm by which to reference when making ethical decision and actions, is a far cry from saying that everything demanding a reference is crystal clear, easily deemed black or white.

[paleocrat]

@Buddythunder1 Relativism is just that, relative. Period. A relativist may admit that there is some strange and elusive norm outside of the individual, but this is horribly problematic and grossly inconsistent. What standard? Who says? How broad is its moral jurisdiction? Who says? Is it binding? Who says? And given relativist presuppositions, who in their right mind would deem their relative answers morally binding on those who disagree? Consistency is the silver bullet on this one.

[NoahIV]

It seems you are using harsh and insulting language for ratings, and to fire up those who already agree with you.

Logic, when applied correctly, can answer these questions. How do we know who's logic is more superior? As long as both views are looking at the same issue differently, then there's no measure. For neither view has comparable merits. Knowledge is all we have to judge things buy. Knowledge and logic.

[paleocrat]

The segment was from my radio show, and I spoke in a manner I believe to be quite appropriate.

For the presuppositionalist, the issue is whether your assumptions about the world, being and knowledge provide any kind of foundation for the use of knowledge and logic.

Tired of debating this most obvious and elementary point.

[MLGV3ngeance]

Hence 70% of people in jail being Christian, so you're saying a christian would be morally rich, yet for this to be true, they wouldn't be in jail. Explain the relevance of that situation

[AndreaZ64]

"being "relative" is not the same as being debated. "

No, but there is debate because there is disagreement about what exactly is right or wrong in certain situations. This disagreement exists because evidently morals are relative. In many situations we can agree on certain morals because we are social primates with the same interests.

Relative does not mean that you have to accept all moral decisions made by anyone. It does not mean that to you personally all moral decisions are equally right.

[killer4hire]

Yes we need a massmurdering evil spirit like the God of the bible to tell us about morality. LOL!

This looney called paleocrat does not understand that atheism does not disapprove different opinions that eventually can change public opinion. But those opinions will first have to spread before society can change because otherwise every minority opinion would have to be implemented which is worse than majority rule.

This guy is just attacking straw mans and has no idea what he is talking about.

[Bourtini]

You must be confusing Atheism with nihilism.

God is not the only necessity for an objective standard, God only represents a single consequence or benefit to an action when there is a lot more to consider. Think of any action you'd like (good or bad), assess consequences and benefits then ask yourself, "would I do it without god's authority?" Is that not enough to say that there is an obligation without God, with one life on this Earth? Life is learning experience and that is how we find good.

[Bourtini]

I hope I can help you see something I've observed,

You say you have moral guidance because of "God said so". The outcome of actions are either a benefit or a consequence. Eliminate God and what consequences or benefits are you left with? Enough to make good decisions? Does mankind lose the ability of understanding what is right and wrong, and retain no sense of sympathy or emotion?

[stallion4life]

The points he makes in this video are all well reasoned, but moron atheists are all honor bound to sink pro-Christian videos in ratings, and they refuse to even entertain opposing points of view. Shows exactly how "free thinking" and "open minded" they really are.

[goonerh1]

How difficult is it for people to understand the basis for morality... it's stunning.

he's clearly heard that morality has something to do with society and has made the rest of it up. It's to do with what people have to do to get on and co-exist beneficially.

Nothing to do with people coming together and deciding.

And these 'problems' you come up with, which suggest that atheism is wrong because it says people disagree about morality... people do disagree about what's right and wrong.

[redshark618]

Choose a damn side already, stop asking "if" and "how". You sound like a little philosophy student bickering about your uncertainty.

This wasn't a discussion. It provoked no thought whatsoever. You failed.

[toThe9thPower]

Wow this is fucking dumb

[kavimander]

retards believe in god

[nosajj12345]

The evidence your belief system has presented proving its superiority and legitimacy is no more veracious than that presented by any other in human culture, past or present. You got some nerve telling anyone they're "morally bankrupt." Nothing more pathetic than an agnry, bitter Christian going on psuedo intellectual rants hoping to gain converts or worse, hoping to best some poor naive Youtube atheist. Get a life, paleocrat!! Try applying the erudition to somehting more worthwhile!

[steventhr]

if one's moral system were only based on experiences, one's system would be constantly changing, so everybody's moral system would be different. eg your moralsystem,if you had not learned otherwise, might be that its ok to sleep with a friend's wife.The friend's moralsystem will normally be that such action is not ok. Who is right?The science world is full of absolutes. Obviouslythe more departure from absolutes in morality(not only sexual), the worse this world becomes.