 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The 'moral' Atheist?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Oct 10 - 11:54 AM Steve Shaw: "and we post the same thought within a minute of each other! You could almost come to think that God had a hand.." Funny, that would come to mind! Anything to get you thinking!!!....well at least honestly! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: John P Date: 27 Oct 10 - 12:08 PM Hmm . . . Accuse anyone you disagree with of thinking dishonestly. What a way to move the discussion forward! How mature! Don't respond, of course, to the answers to your statement that atheists are weird for adhering to the Golden Rule or to the fact that Jesus didn't originate it. Care to go for being part of the conversation instead of lobbing insults into it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 12:09 PM >>I ask you, for all the high ideals of whatever church or religion that you belong to, can you say unequivecably that you have found the answer when there are so many that disagree.<< I don't see most Muslims or Christians unequivocally saying they have found the one answer. I do see that from the so called fundamentalists. But in spite of their vocal energy and spending on propaganda, they are not the majority. I don't say that I have found The One Answer, I have found the answer that works for me. Sometimes I say to others, "It works for me. It might work for you." Jesus and Paul called us to spread the Word. In the society we live in that is as far as I am prepared to go because of the greater commandment of "love thy neighbor as thy self." Would I want my neighbor telling me that I am going to hell if I don't do things exactly their way? No. So I don't do it to others. I don't advocate terrorism, or stealing treasure or land from natives in the name of "Saving them." I don't believe my tax money should be spent supporting Israeli settlers who burn Palistinian Olive trees to steal land supposedly vaguely promised by "God" through the rantings of old Testament Prophets. The whole thing looked to me like a self fulfilling suicide pact. When I was an Atheist, I had a Catholic put it to me this way. "What if you are wrong? If you are an Atheist and you are right after death there is nothing. If you are wrong you go to Hell." It remains to this day a logical point which did not convince me then or now. But what if you are a Zionist and you are wrong? What if you start World War three over little patch of Mediterranean shore line and the Messiah does not come? Or worse what if he intended to come but on his own timetable not yours. What if your presumption to speak for him has helped to kill a hundred million people including yourself and He is not grateful. What if he is angry? This is what I think of when I see the vocal minority of "so called fundamentalists" and "conservatives" playing their dominance games. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Ed T Date: 27 Oct 10 - 12:15 PM "can you say unequivecably that you have found the answer when there are so many that disagree". I can't see that any person can reasonably say that they have unequivecably found "the answer" on most if not all aspects of life....even you. However, many, if not most, can say that they have found an answer that works for them, at this time. I can't see how you can logically alude to a statement that suggests that finding what works for a person would be based on a popularity test. If that is your case, then I suspect that, given their population, opinions in China and India would rule world opinions. Also, keep in mind that all people that believe in a God do not belong to any organized church, or religion. That leaves them out of a direct relationship with many past misdeeds caused by those claiming to be following organized religions, or those who were not followers of such. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 12:17 PM GfS was out of line, He often is. But he only ever speaks for himself. Would the Atheists on this thread please tell me whether or not they think this type of comment is appropriate? It seems like rude mocking and baiting to me. >>You could almost come to think that God had a hand...tee hee.<< |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Mrrzy Date: 27 Oct 10 - 01:13 PM Christianity claims to have the "only" answer - the only way to heaven is through him, no? Mocking can be rude, I agtee. But the comment as quoted doesn't seem rude to me, albeit mocking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Oct 10 - 01:48 PM Hey Jack......I was quoting Steve......have another 'hit'..then at least you have an excuse for being so.....umm...'careless'. (That was the 'polite' word). I surely wouldn't want to upset you to the point that you would start thinking! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 03:31 PM >>Gosh, 'The Golden Rule'...isn't that "Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you'??....Hmmm, where have I heard that before???<<< I am sorry, I have stopped reading Steve carefully Maybe I missed it? If you can show me where he said the above before you I will apologize. But it looks to me like you were mocking John P's beliefs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Ed T Date: 27 Oct 10 - 03:57 PM "Christianity claims to have the "only" answer - the only way to heaven is through him, no?" So, what would that claim, if accurate, really matter to Atheists, anyway? Since, true Athiests, if there is such a thing (and, not infinately defined), don't believe (aka, put much stock in) there being a heaven to go to anyway...let alone a "he/she/it" to make any such such claims? I just don't get the point of some Atheist hang ups with what others believe or don't believe (be they magic, Gods, or Santa). However, I do see a legitimate concern for potential negative impacts of some organized religions and associated actions on societies who do bad under a religious pretense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 04:01 PM Amen Ed! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Oct 10 - 04:23 PM "I just don't get the point of some Atheist hang ups with what others believe or don't believe (be they magic, Gods, or Santa)." Well, you could always argue that atheists should shut up altogether I suppose. Or you could accept that thay have valid points to make without your adding, snidely and in kneejerk fashion, that their points of view are hang-ups. It's simple. Believe or don't believe what you like, but once you air your beliefs in public you have to take the flak if flak is forthcoming. You have no monopoly on truth. If I happen to contest your beliefs you should be pleased that I'm interested enough to engage you, not slagging me off for having hang-ups (in other words, because I don't agree with you). As for your short-list, well there's a massive groundswell on this planet for belief in God, which is why this thread exists. I am not prepared at all to give similar respect to purveyors of magic or Santa, or goblins or flower fairies at the bottom of your garden. If I'm irrational at all it's because I don't automatically lump your God in with that lot. Can't you see just how nice we atheists are? Tee hee! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Amos Date: 27 Oct 10 - 04:42 PM WHen people claim cures for assorted woes such as cancer, and when paid for them deliver something else, we take justice action against them of some sort. To claim one has a sole path to spiritual salvation --as Christ teaches in some versions -- and then largely fail to deliver is comparable, in a spiritual transaction, to offering such cures. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Mrrzy Date: 27 Oct 10 - 04:44 PM Again, it's the harm. We can't just shut up and "respect" belief any more. The harm outweighs the politeness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 05:28 PM Are some Muslims terrorists or as O'Reilly says, Do we have a "Muslim problem? Are all Christains causing harm? Are all Christians Pat Robertson or Sarah Palin? Is the belief in religion that is causing the problem or is it the fanatical belief in religion? Or worse, the abuse of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Ed T Date: 27 Oct 10 - 05:42 PM "WHen people claim cures for assorted woes such as cancer, and when paid for them deliver something else, we take justice action against them of some sort". Well Amos, you are kinda comparing apples and peanuts? (BTW, there are plenty of alternative cures that do not face legal actions...check out hemopathy and an assortment of other bogus cures and medicines) Anyway, to go along with the (silly) flawed comparisons...there are no claims for any medical cures that I know of. Maybe a claim for entry to a heaven. If it does not work out, I guess you could lodge a civil suite for damages. But, if there is ever proven to bea hereafter, should Atheists also be liable for a civil suit, for all the lost sould with nowhere to go,since there would be no entry? And BTW, regigion is a belief, not a cure. "To claim one has a sole path to spiritual salvation --as Christ teaches in some versions -- and then largely fail to deliver is comparable, in a spiritual transaction, to offering such cures". Again, no medical cures on Earth, just personal salvation in a hereafter is promised as a reward for belief. Most religions make the same or similar claims, not just the one you mention. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Oct 10 - 06:07 PM "Are some Muslims terrorists or as O'Reilly says, Do we have a "Muslim problem? Are all Christains causing harm? Are all Christians Pat Robertson or Sarah Palin? Is the belief in religion that is causing the problem or is it the fanatical belief in religion? Or worse, the abuse of it." You forgot something. Are all atheists.....? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Mrrzy Date: 27 Oct 10 - 07:22 PM It doesn't matter if they are all causing harm. I will do what I can to stop those who do. And to alert people to the harm that many seem to be ignoring. And to get people to think, critically if possible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Jon Date: 27 Oct 10 - 07:32 PM Is the belief in religion that is causing the problem or is it the fanatical belief in religion? Or worse, the abuse of it. I think it is abuse. A basic Christian "Love thy neighbour as you love yourself" ought only to do good. "Ah but I am a catholic and he is a protestant/ Muslim/ will abbrev to is not like me" seems capable of creating horrors. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 07:33 PM Mrrzy I think it matters if you do not blame those who are actually doing harm. Osama Bin Ladin is doing harm. He should be executed or put in jail. The guy with the mustache who runs the BP down the street is just running a gas station. They are both Muslims. Should both be put in jail or executed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 07:47 PM I think it matters if you do not blame ONLY those who are actually doing harm. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Steve Shaw Date: 27 Oct 10 - 07:50 PM "Osama Bin Ladin is doing harm. He should be executed or put in jail." Well, we could accord him the full process of the justice system first, and possibly refrain from executing him, which would bring us down to his level. I thought lynching had been abolished. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Mrrzy Date: 27 Oct 10 - 10:08 PM I don't blame the people doing harm, I blame their reasoning. It isnt' their fault they were brought up to believe what they were brought up to believe; now, though, they should think for themselves, and teaching people not to think for themselves but to accept dogma is harmful to all, and I will fight that too. Fight being a relative term - I am still a pacifist. No, I don't blame all moslems for 9/11, not all christians for the hateful displays at military funeralsmurders of gynecologists, or the imbecilities they put into my kids' history books. I do blame both islam and christianity for fomenting that mentality, though, since without religion, none of the above would be happening. It is immoral, to me, to allow this imbecility to go on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jack the Sailor Date: 27 Oct 10 - 10:14 PM In that case you may need to find a country that doesn't have freedom of religion in the constitution. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Steamin Date: 28 Oct 10 - 07:53 AM Somebody should be executed? Where did that come from? I note that in those undeveloped countries where civilisation has not progressed sufficiently, they still murder their citizens rather than keep them out of society's way. As death row in mates in The USA invariably find Jesus during their wait, does that mean all Christians etc etc. Even those who run the local BP garage... Apparently, you can rattle on about all merciful, a love that passeth all understanding, love thy neighbour blah blah blah, but at the same time lick you lips at the thought of a criminal being executed. Dunno about atheist, we seem to fall down at the "moral" part of the phrase... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: kendall Date: 28 Oct 10 - 08:44 AM Was it Rabbi Heliel who, when asked to explain the Bible briefly said, "Do not do unto others that which you would not have them do to you. All the rest is commentary." Talk about commentary, there is plenty here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 28 Oct 10 - 10:16 AM This thread started with our nautical friend posing a question. I thought it a fair question, objective and straight forward. I suspected his motive, but I am a cynical old sod at the best of times. Has the question been answered? And if so, what was said answer? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Oct 10 - 10:40 AM Jack the Sailor says this:
Steamin' Willie asks about Jack's original question, which started this thread. Jack's question:
Little Hawk answered the question in the second post - and maybe the discussion should have stopped right there, because again I think that most of us agree. Little Hawk's answer:
1. by following a predetermined set of moral rules (the passive way. Doesn't involve much independent thought) 2. by following the Golden Rule, which is.... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...and also...don't inflict upon others what you would not want inflicted upon you." This means allowing others the same freedom and autonomy and consideration and kindness that you yourself desire. (the active way. Involves much independent thought.) It's pretty simple really. The active way is definitely a more enlightened path, in my opinion. This is the way we all make moral choices, either by following a moral code, or by following more general principles like the Golden Rule. And whether we follow a numbered code or a more general principle, the morality of our actions then depends on the quality of the code or principle that we follow. Can anyone disagree with that? -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: kendall Date: 28 Oct 10 - 10:50 AM I can't believe that a loving, caring God would give me a good brain and then punish me for using it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Jon Date: 28 Oct 10 - 11:18 AM Maybe it is our own placement of our "wisdom" that lets us down, Kendall? I really wish I could answer this to sort myself out... .. Whatever, I do say the few mental/drug(including alcohol) got down by it all struggler's I know are (apart from me...) highly intelligent and sensitive people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Mrrzy Date: 28 Oct 10 - 11:21 AM Freedom of religion should not trump other freedoms, the way it does here in the US. In British courts, belief in the supernatural dpes not trump a child's right to health care; here it does. It also trumps a child's right to an education, if their parents' denying evolution can make the school not teach it. As it can. Or they can opt their kids out of classes that contradict their couter-factual beliefs, rather than requiring the kids to learn the actual facts. That is the harm I fight. Joe, I agree with you, but it doesn't answer the question of how an atheist comes up with their moral code, given the assumption that it takes deity to point out the difference between good and bad. I, of course, challenge that assumption anyway. To me, it is a much more interesting question how a follower of deity, whose dogma preaches something obviously (to most of us) immoral, can come up with their own sense of right and wrong anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Stringsinger Date: 28 Oct 10 - 06:24 PM Back to the original question that Jack posed. "Good and evil" are generally defined by religionists. There is an extreme view of this that is called Manichean. To define "good and evil" successfully, you would have to take it out of a religious context for it to make any sense. You could also use the terms "functional" and "dysfunctional" which removes the religious onus from their meanings. Also "good and evil" must continually be defined and redefined for much of this is in the "eye of the beholder". There is a general societal idea of "good and evil" which has to do with what is workable to maintain a stability in society. This doesn't require any religious belief. Often, this is what some call "common sense". If you violate another by violence or theft, it follows that the same can be applied to you. The original meaning of the Golden Rule predates Christianity and says in historical accuracy, "Don't do to others which you would not like done to you". I think that works for atheists as well as anyone else. (I insist that this concept came before any bible was conceived.) Morality is another problem. This has to be continuously defined as well. It also must be debated rationally. For example, I consider war to be immoral. This debate might last for days but it's still an important one in my opinion. Also, many religions can entertain immoral acts as well as some governments and laws. Again, these must be debated rationally in context. The moral atheist does indeed exist but probably requires definitions and discussions to reveal this. I will conclude by saying that religion and morality are not always compatible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Oct 10 - 06:40 PM Mrr, I think Stringsinger gave a pretty good answer. Things are "good" or "evil" for us, according to how they are helpful or harmful to our vision for the way things should be. And I think most of us share a common vision for most things. That's how we have survived as a species. My vision may conflict with your vision in some ways, and that's where we may have problems - but for most people, the (unamplified) Ten Commandments (without the God stuff) and Golden Rule work pretty well. They're basically common sense. Don't kill, don't steal, don't lie, don't cheat on your spouse (or somebody else's), honor your parents, and treat people like you'd like to be treated - can anybody seriously disagree with these? I suppose Cause No Harm might be another way to say it. For most people, it doesn't make a big difference whether they live by an enumerated moral code, or by broader moral principles. One way or another, consciously or not, we choose the way we live according to our vision. Mrr, I know you have some trouble with the God stuff, but I just can't see how it's harmful. We ALL have beliefs that may or may not be true. Like it or not, not one of us is fully "enlightened." And whether there is a God or not, I can't believe we will be punished for what we do or do not believe. It's who we are and how we treat others that makes the difference. When you place so much importance on WHAT people believe, you're talking like the fundamentalists, insisting that we must have proper ideology in order to be "saved." That's nonsense. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Amos Date: 28 Oct 10 - 07:15 PM I see no reason for religiosity to enter into the question of what is good or evil. People strive for survival, and measure goodness to the degree that it seems to strengthen the future existence of the things they consider are part of them--selves, families, societies, and species, belongings, etc. Because of this common trait, most folks look on productive, cnstructive acts as more good, and destructive ones as more evil, depending on context. No religion involved, but a perfectly good working definition. Why go off-shore? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Jeri Date: 28 Oct 10 - 07:28 PM Joe, you know the phrase "Don't make me go all Old Testament on your ass?" There's stuff in there that goes against stuff in other places. The bits about for what causes you should stone somebody to death goes against the "Thou shalt not kill" thing, except I think the literal translation of that is more like "Thou shalt not murder." (Italics are mine.) I said this before, but whatthehell. As someone who doesn't believe in a deity, I think all of the religious teachings, 10 commandments and all, came from people. There were reasons for them at the time, and they still mostly make sense. It isn't the slightest bit ironic that I consider them when evaluating right and wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Ed T Date: 28 Oct 10 - 07:50 PM "Freedom of religion should not trump other freedoms" Is this not more of a political question, rather than a religious one? My observation is that different countries have sorted that out differently, stimulated by changes in their societies. I suspect that anticipation of change would "wake the Genie" within the extreme end of various interest groups on either side on this type of issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Oct 10 - 08:56 PM I really want something to trump the so-called "right" of Americans to walk around with guns in their hands (or wherever), which some people defend with religious fervor (and with reference to religion). The recent Supreme Court decision on guns really bothers me, as does the decision to allow guns in national parks. Now, THAT is against my moral code. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Donuel Date: 28 Oct 10 - 09:38 PM To be a normal moral sthiest today is a bit like being Jesus in a village of a few good people living in a small nation of mostly barbarians. I bet you have felt like "why me," why do I seem to be the most moral person amidst all these people who brag about their religiosity while they behave immorally in the basic tenents of life. IF the 10 commandments were an SAT I suppose I got an 800 (after marriage). I never killed, never cheated on my wife never blah blah blah. I suppose I could have honored my parents more but that is scored subjectively like an essay. I do not open carry. The feeling one gets from open carry is somthing hard to describe. It fills a hole their soul. IT grants a feeling of importence with no deserved respect. It is like Cocaine. The feeling at first is like you have just invented something spectacular and powerful only to feel later there was nothing made nothing great. Local laws now allow open carry in bars specificly. Whats the worst that could happen there? Most of the worst shootings are in schools and on the street. What can we do to "upstage the rightoious right"? It has been oratory, demonstrations, dress, art, music, movies and literature. IF there are more or better vehicles for peace than that I would try it. on a day to day basis it is true one act of kindness gets passed down. Even if its only a compliment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Donuel Date: 28 Oct 10 - 10:38 PM The last but most powerful means of becoming an instrument for moral athiest peace is Martyrdom. Worldwide recognition is essential to be poised as a symbol and a person. Then and only then does martyrdom propel all your efforts far into the future where your own toiling hands can not go. MLK had a history with the church he could use suprerely well. For an athiest to have such a path would probably require a Church of Moralism as well as other humanist organizations for support. hmm the church of moralism could be the ultimate ecumenical church of all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Oct 10 - 01:34 AM Joe: "The recent Supreme Court decision on guns really bothers me, as does the decision to allow guns in national parks. Now, THAT is against my moral code." Then don't carry one, and the decision becomes meaningless! BTW, Joe, I liked your post: Date: 28 Oct 10 - 10:40 AM!...Especially Little Hawk's: "Most morally strong people decide what is right or wrong one of two ways: 1. by following a predetermined set of moral rules (the passive way. Doesn't involve much independent thought) 2. by following the Golden Rule, which is.... "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you...and also...don't inflict upon others what you would not want inflicted upon you." This means allowing others the same freedom and autonomy and consideration and kindness that you yourself desire. (the active way. Involves much independent thought.) It's pretty simple really. The active way is definitely a more enlightened path, in my opinion." In other words, as stated, live within a strong moral code WITHIN YOU, and the rest is of none effect! (Maybe someday our 'leaders' will follow that!..They sure don't represent that, or us!) GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Joe Offer Date: 29 Oct 10 - 01:44 AM Sanity, I had guns pointed at me once, and I never want that to happen again. Another man's "god-given right" to carry a gun can profoundly interfere with my right to life and limb. I think my right trumps theirs. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Oct 10 - 02:14 AM Joe Offer: "I think my right trumps theirs." Well, at least it puts you on equal footing. Get one, too, and be responsible, which I trust you would be. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The 'moral' Atheist? From: Steve Shaw Date: 29 Oct 10 - 06:26 AM "*from* Sanity." Right... |
