THIS IS A ‘SERIOUS’ DEBATE FOOL YOU CAN’T JUST BARGE IN HERE LIKE THAT

BirdofPrey Posted:

yeah by ‘self-worship’ i didn’t mean yourself, i meant mankind in general. And at our best, mankind is really really great, for sure, with astonishing creativity and accomplishments, but it doesn’t take very much for us to turn to complete **** as history has shown again and again.

I think of it as a good thing. It’s a celebration of the good and a hope to not repeat the bad. A strive to create a better world through your actions.

I think that’s where religious guidelines come in handy (except for when they’re abused, i.e. the christian church throughout its entire history),

and that’s also the difference between ‘religious morals’ and ‘secular morals’. If there was no religion there would certainly be morals, but they would be more of a reflection of current social norms and very subject to change, while religious morals are more set in stone and can keep **** straight for generations. I am of course leaving out those religious morals whose ‘set-in-stoneness’ hurts rather than helps because they’re so very special and borderline evil Log in to see images!

I can’t really see much of a difference between secular and religious morals, other than set in stones that end up hurting – no offense. Killing will most likely always be shunned, as will thievery and etc.

But then again i’m a fabulous persongy moral relativist so I think change with time is a good thing. Log in to see images!

THIS THREAD IS NOW ABOUT MAKING SUPERHEROES OUT OF OTHER POSTERS HERE IS NANA

Log in to see images!

OH GOD I’M SO LONELY

ahahahha oh god you’ve ruined everything Log in to see images!

nanafabulous personjesus Posted:

ahahahha oh god you’ve ruined everything Log in to see images!

YOUR woman's genitals WILL BE LIKE A PLOUGHED FIELD1!!

BirdofPrey Posted:

lol

expound plz

ok…

lah de dah! lets subscribe to a philosophy that renders life accidental and meaningless, at the same time absolving us of personal responsibility!

atheism doesn’t do any of those things by itself.

* so what if life IS accidental? anthropic principle says that there’ll be LIFE wherever there’s LIFE – ****ing obvious – even if it’s an accident. Considering how much NOTHING there is up in space – vastly more of it than there is stuff – I’d say that NOTHING is considerably more normal than you are.

* your life’s meaningless without god, is it? i’m very sorry to hear it.

* consider a person, alone, in a vast sea of nothing. you HAVE no personale responsibilities in that context – responsibilities are a macroscopic side effect of having a society to exist in. Your responsibilities are clear and obvious. If you shirk them, you will be taken down by the man, because the man = everyone else, and everyone else > you. That’s the whole point of society as a construct. Embrace your inner cog, for you are what makes the machine tick, and the machine doesn’t care whether or not you believe in that.

oh and while we’re at it lets typify all religious people as cloistered fundies who shun science!

You’re not really helping with this point, but this is also quite clearly the sort of thing that ignorant theists say to sarcastically attack atheists. Skip it.

Well bop, it’s not atheism that says you’re absolved of all moral responsibility, it’s not believing in free will that does.

No it ****ing well does not. If you believe in a lack of free-will (which, as a technicality, I do – it’s incompatible with the theory of cause and effect), that’s neither here nor there; but if you believe that that means you don’t have to think for yourself, then you’re a ****ing cretin and you deserve whatever sticky end you earn for yourself, and also you don’t understand what ‘free-will’ means.

Free-will in the context of causality is pretty narrowly defined. It’s the concept that were the entire universe to re-run from the beginning, presenting every person with exactly the same stimulus at every point in their lives, that some how you would have the ability to jump out of your own brain and change your mind on something that you already decided. Bull ****. What a stupid idea.

Most atheists pretend they still have morals despite their lack of religion, but this is somewhat of a paradox as religion is the source of all morals.

That’s the most very special thing I’ve ever heard. Religious morals are directly descended from evolved rules of societal living, so your reasoning is backwards. Morals quite clearly existed before religion did, because all religions and non-religions have the same morals in common.

Atheism is one of the devil’s many tricks to try to get you to turn from from God.

Don’t appeal to religion when answering your own questions on whether or not religion exists, it makes you sound like a retard.

Most atheists were raised by atheists parents without any moral fiber.

Yawn.

I’d say a good percent of these parents are gay ‘partners’ who have chosen to adopt. This is one of my many reasons for not wanting to allow gay adoption.

Right. Atheism is caused by gays. Go **** a lemon.

Intelligent Design is yet another tool of the devil as ID recognizes that evolution does occur but says it’s guided by God. The problem with this is that this conflicts with the bible account of things and is inherently blasphemous.

Do I even need to rebum this?

atheists who still adhere to a moral standard are basically just secular humanists

Yes… so?

and don’t even get me started on how bankrupt that philosophy is.

Are you familiar with the straw-man fallacy? You just did that, right there. Yes you did! You just said that atheists are “more or less” secular humanists (a term I’m vaguely familiar with, but certainly not a “doctrine” i’ve “subscribed to”Log in to see images!, then called that a philosophy that’s bankrupt. Well, maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. What the hell has that got to do with me? Don’t TRANSFER YOUR ATTACK on atheists to someone else who’s in a weaker position, claiming that that someone else is all atheists. That’s quite simply bad form my dear fellow. I think in the schoolyard they call that “picking on someone who’s smaller than you”.

Do you believe evolution happened?

I wrote a ****ing genetic algorithm 6 months ago, it was a piece of ****.

not morally bankrupt, morally they’re fine by me, but it certainly doesn’t work very well as a full-fledged philosophy.

Did you just switcheroo on the old opinion there? yes you diiiiid you naughty boy! slap on the wrist.

Actually, I’m more of an ‘ignostic’.

Thread over, nana wins!

yeah by ‘self-worship’ i didn’t mean yourself, i meant mankind in general.

Religion is only valid in the context of society, so that sounds like exactly the RIGHT way to worship…

And at our best, mankind is really really great, for sure, with astonishing creativity and accomplishments, but it doesn’t take very much for us to turn to complete **** as history has shown again and again.

Again, this is only relevant in the context of society. If god exists it certainly wouldn’t give a **** about microbes as tiny as us! If we wipe ourselves out, the order of the universe continues uninterrupted. Which is both awesome, tragic and COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT on the grand scale of the universe. That’s why worshipping mankind is probably a much better idea in the long run if you value being a part of this species. (And if you don’t: go go gadget emoblade!)

If there was no religion there would certainly be morals, but they would be more of a reflection of current social norms and very subject to change,

Ignoring the part of the sentence that I already rebumed, RELIGIOUS morals have ALWAYS just been a reflection of current social norms ANYWAY and ARE subject to change (the “new 10 commandments” anyone?)

Ok, excuse the trollish overtones to my reply, however I’m totally and utterly right and I don’t care what you say in reply.

ahahahaha jesus benzo, i wasn’t serious when i asked you to expound. chill out

BirdofPrey Posted:

ahahahaha jesus benzo, i wasn’t serious when i asked you to expound. chill out

Would you deny me my fun, dear sir? I think not. As every trole gno, we burn these bridges as we come to them.

nanafabulous personjesus Posted:

What’s so wrong about people finding meaning through different avenues? Can you honestly say his life is any worse than yours because he finds meaning in something you don’t?

Indirectly, that was my point. I’d prefer it if people found meaning through different avenues. What BoP said, though, was that atheism renders life meaningless.

You’re not helping counter his point with the attitude you’re taking in this post, honestly.

Attacking my conduct rather than my content is kinda Camwhorish you OOC trollfabulous person! (My conduct was not intended to be pleasant, but I stand by what I said. Log in to see images!~)

It doesn’t mean you don’t understanding what free will means, it means you’re using your lack of belief in it to excuse your actions.

No, it means you don’t understand what lack of free will implies. If you understood what it implies, you’d see that it doesn’t excuse anything. Anyone who betrays themselves like this is a fool.

Don’t worry, I agree.

\o/

I was trolling.

I know.

On the gay issue though, if religion believes homosexuality to be immoral, it’s not a stretch for the belief that homosexuals will pbum on a lack of morals to their children.

That’s a transitive fallacy because each individual moral from the set is not co-dependent on any other. So a homosexual would bring up a child to believe that homosexuality is OK; in that sense they’d pbum on a single dubious “immorality”. But it does not affect any other morals from the set because none of them depend on that one.

But the bible says God specifically made us. It doesn’t matter how big the universe is, he made us and is watching us. He made the universe for us.

The bible was written by men, and men are self-centered, so of course it says that. Back in those days, that was fairly credible stuff.