How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

[sealybobo]

I do not follow any religion. You must have mistaken me for someone else.

that's odd because you are always quoting the various bibles and interpreting their scriptures ....

Odd indeed.

the above is not written in American, how does that work if you are suppose to read the text to be religious .

Like I said, I do not follow any religion.

Sheesh...

You have a personal relationship with God, right? I used to believe that too

Nah, my beliefs are not about reciting some magic words and then having an imaginary friend.

Lets just say that I am intimately acquainted with the essence of life. I read all of the stories, I understand the teaching. Nothing is hidden from me. I always do exactly as God commands and dwell in the sanctuary of God.

You always do as god commands? Always?

 

[hobelim]

I do not follow any religion. You must have mistaken me for someone else.

that's odd because you are always quoting the various bibles and interpreting their scriptures ....

Odd indeed.

the above is not written in American, how does that work if you are suppose to read the text to be religious .

Like I said, I do not follow any religion.

Sheesh...

You have a personal relationship with God, right? I used to believe that too

Nah, my beliefs are not about reciting some magic words and then having an imaginary friend.

Lets just say that I am intimately acquainted with the essence of life. I read all of the stories, I understand the teaching. Nothing is hidden from me. I always do exactly as God commands and dwell in the sanctuary of God.

You always do as god commands? Always?

Yes, once you understand the hidden subjects and conform to the deeper implications only alluded to by the figurative language used in the written law its really very easy. do this , don't do that.


Most of the law is simply about not doing something inherently stupid. No positive action or work required at all.. How hard is that?


If you were walking down the street and a zombie offered you a piece of his own rotting flesh for you to eat would you have a hard time saying no thanks?

Would it be difficult for you to refrain from swallowing the teachings of unclean creatures that do not ruminate? How hard it is to not get down on your hands and or knees before a lifeless object, the work of human hands? How hard is it to not ask favors from a block of wood or seek guidance from ghosts? How hard is it really to not bear false witness, mislead your neighbors, and not murder by lying in the name of God?

Don't you already willingly conform to all these things? Or do you feel burdened and oppressed by God establishing law that promotes good mental health and peaceful coexistence?


do think its impossible for people to learn from their mistakes? Die and then come back to life?

You said you once went for that specious personal relationship with Jesus bs and all you had to do was recite a few written lines, confess to being a worthless piece of shit and apologize to God for being human to be saved?

How can you possibly not believe that the dead can come back to life?

 

[james bond]

Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?

It must be my exaggerated Machismo (sarcasm).

Why don't you trust NPR? Which programming offends you? Have you ever listened to any of the programming? I suspect you are only echoing the meme promulgated by the Right Wing?

You pegged me wrong. I'm an independent and a contrarian now. (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.) Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older. The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate. I've met Nancy Pelosi and when she was younger, she wasn't as extreme left as she is now. The only Democrat I'll support and work for is Dianne Feinstein because she knew my father. I suppose one has to be perceived extreme left or right now to get elected. I can't get behind libertarians because they're not loyal. Their ideas for small government may be good, but they're unreliable. It's too hard to talk with liberals even if they're slightly to the left of center now. Maybe the last time they had a "decent" candidate was Barack Obama before the election in 2008. However, he turned out to be very wrong for the country. The slightly to the left of center liberals will end up voting more left. Their minds are pretty much made up. The only liberals I can talk with are the independents.

I've listened to NPR and CNN when they first started and still do (forced to). I used to donate to public broadcasting on a regular basis. CNN is piped into the employees fitness center, smaller cafeteria and break room at Apple. We listened to NPR in my previous van pool. Both have become more biased mainstream news and opinion circa 2011.

So, it doesn't offend me. It just voices liberal-biased news and opinion. I'm not for USG sponsored healthcare because I don't think federal government should be in that business. I favor smaller government and have more states power. With healthcare, I realize it has to be federal. Maybe a public corporation can run it. There would have to be some changes to laws and government support for them to take on the high-risk insurable such as preexisting conditions and the poor. (I get it's not fair for a family when grave illness strikes any family member. It could wipe out their finances from which they cannot recover.) However, everyone would have to participate. Thus, there will have to be some government involved such as they're already involved with Medicare.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?

It must be my exaggerated Machismo (sarcasm).

Why don't you trust NPR? Which programming offends you? Have you ever listened to any of the programming? I suspect you are only echoing the meme promulgated by the Right Wing?

You pegged me wrong. I'm an independent and a contrarian now. (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.) Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older. The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate. I've met Nancy Pelosi and when she was younger, she wasn't as extreme left as she is now. The only Democrat I'll support and work for is Dianne Feinstein because she knew my father. I suppose one has to be perceived extreme left or right now to get elected. I can't get behind libertarians because they're not loyal. Their ideas for small government may be good, but they're unreliable. It's too hard to talk with liberals even if they're slightly to the left of center now. Maybe the last time they had a "decent" candidate was Barack Obama before the election in 2008. However, he turned out to be very wrong for the country. The slightly to the left of center liberals will end up voting more left. Their minds are pretty much made up. The only liberals I can talk with are the independents.

I've listened to NPR and CNN when they first started and still do (forced to). I used to donate to public broadcasting on a regular basis. CNN is piped into the employees fitness center, smaller cafeteria and break room at Apple. We listened to NPR in my previous van pool. Both have become more biased mainstream news and opinion circa 2011.

So, it doesn't offend me. It just voices liberal-biased news and opinion. I'm not for USG sponsored healthcare because I don't think federal government should be in that business. I favor smaller government and have more states power. With healthcare, I realize it has to be federal. Maybe a public corporation can run it. There would have to be some changes to laws and government support for them to take on the high-risk insurable such as preexisting conditions and the poor. (I get it's not fair for a family when grave illness strikes any family member. It could wipe out their finances from which they cannot recover.) However, everyone would have to participate. Thus, there will have to be some government involved such as they're already involved with Medicare.

My dad new Feinstein too, he worked at the City Hall in SF during her time as a member of the Board of Sups and Mayor. He like her legs. NPR may seem liberal to a conservative, but the varied programming is IMO well balanced, the interviews especially, and when contrasted to Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage, and others of their genre (conservatives) there is no doubt that NPR discusses all sides of the issues and all are given time and a fair hearing.

 

[BreezeWood]

Mea culpa. That posted, why be such a smart ass, why not point out an error and show you are civilized?

It must be my exaggerated Machismo (sarcasm).

Why don't you trust NPR? Which programming offends you? Have you ever listened to any of the programming? I suspect you are only echoing the meme promulgated by the Right Wing?

You pegged me wrong. I'm an independent and a contrarian now. (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.) Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older. The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate. I've met Nancy Pelosi and when she was younger, she wasn't as extreme left as she is now. The only Democrat I'll support and work for is Dianne Feinstein because she knew my father. I suppose one has to be perceived extreme left or right now to get elected. I can't get behind libertarians because they're not loyal. Their ideas for small government may be good, but they're unreliable. It's too hard to talk with liberals even if they're slightly to the left of center now. Maybe the last time they had a "decent" candidate was Barack Obama before the election in 2008. However, he turned out to be very wrong for the country. The slightly to the left of center liberals will end up voting more left. Their minds are pretty much made up. The only liberals I can talk with are the independents.

I've listened to NPR and CNN when they first started and still do (forced to). I used to donate to public broadcasting on a regular basis. CNN is piped into the employees fitness center, smaller cafeteria and break room at Apple. We listened to NPR in my previous van pool. Both have become more biased mainstream news and opinion circa 2011.

So, it doesn't offend me. It just voices liberal-biased news and opinion. I'm not for USG sponsored healthcare because I don't think federal government should be in that business. I favor smaller government and have more states power. With healthcare, I realize it has to be federal. Maybe a public corporation can run it. There would have to be some changes to laws and government support for them to take on the high-risk insurable such as preexisting conditions and the poor. (I get it's not fair for a family when grave illness strikes any family member. It could wipe out their finances from which they cannot recover.) However, everyone would have to participate. Thus, there will have to be some government involved such as they're already involved with Medicare.

.....................................
.

You pegged me wrong. I'm an independent and a contrarian now. (A contrarian isn't one who goes against the majority, but one who thinks for himeself.) Used to be slightly to the left of center, then moved to slightly to right of center as I got older. The Democrats are too extreme leftist now if Hillary Clinton was their candidate.

What cons do not want is socialist healthcare enacted by the USG. Already our healthcare system is worse because of Obama and the Democrats.

the only reason you are discussing healthcare, beyond your own is because it was intractably brought to the public attention that now requires remediation. as in contrast to the previous administration that did nothing at all.

Maybe a public corporation can run it.

run what ...

 

[james bond]

the only reason you are discussing healthcare, beyond your own is because it was intractably brought to the public attention that now requires remediation. as in contrast to the previous administration that did nothing at all.

Too much quote mining.

run what ...

I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents. You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%. Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos. At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone. Don't have primo insurance? Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles. You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle. We take care of everybody.

 

[BreezeWood]

I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents. You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%. Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos. At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone. Don't have primo insurance? Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles. You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle. We take care of everybody.

thankfully we have the USG.

... alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos.

that's not a joke for many with chronic pain and as a remedy for certain ailments but why bother ...

Florida Legislature Can't Agree on Medical Marijuana

Rules to enact Florida’s medical marijuana amendment went up in smoke on Friday after the Legislature failed to pass a bill.

But it collapsed on Friday when the chambers could not agree on the number of retail dispensaries that a medical marijuana treatment center can operate.


states have no business setting national standards for Health Care.

 

[james bond]

I should run my own CO2 medical marijuana extraction lab called Heavenly Scents. You get wax, shatter, tuna can hash, CBD, CBN, THC, hash oil, and an assortment of cartridges for 50% while your insurance pays the other 50%. Takes care of all your ailments + alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos. At least, you'll go with a smile on your face if you're too far gone. Don't have primo insurance? Never fear, we got the DIY roll your own doobie pack and edibles. You'll find a plan that fits your lifestyle. We take care of everybody.

thankfully we have the USG.

... alleviates your pain and suffering for three whole mos.

that's not a joke for many with chronic pain and as a remedy for certain ailments but why bother ...

Florida Legislature Can't Agree on Medical Marijuana

Rules to enact Florida’s medical marijuana amendment went up in smoke on Friday after the Legislature failed to pass a bill.

But it collapsed on Friday when the chambers could not agree on the number of retail dispensaries that a medical marijuana treatment center can operate.


states have no business setting national standards for Health Care.

Ack. However, again you have shown your true colors of being a dirkwut. My Heavenly Scents and I will conquer the world because of its quality, safety and integrity.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

Ack. However, again you have shown your true colors of being a dirkwut. My Heavenly Scents and I will conquer the world because of its quality, safety and integrity.

sorry, conbottom your not the first in that line however probably the only one that failed to support the Affordable Care Act to allow those types of enterprises to operate freely in the public domain. -

and again as always thinking only for yourself.

 

[james bond]

.

Ack. However, again you have shown your true colors of being a dirkwut. My Heavenly Scents and I will conquer the world because of its quality, safety and integrity.

sorry, conbottom your not the first in that line however probably the only one that failed to support the Affordable Care Act to allow those types of enterprises to operate freely in the public domain. -

and again as always thinking only for yourself.

What part of quality, safety and integrity did you not get? Of course, it's to help those with health issues and it helps recreational users avoid jail time or fines as well as provide a cleaner, better and safer product. We do not want to violate the law as there are still felony and misdemeanor laws to limit possession amount and personal cultivation.

Also, your second link above argues FOR medical marijuana. It's safer than opioid like I said. Big Pharma just wants time to figure out how they can make money with it. Your first link is just a technicality and we've seen the legislation move forward. Big Alcohol should take a hit, too. I can't stop you from abusing OxyContin and booze. You lose again, bunky.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...te-passes-medical-marijuana-implementing-bill

 

[james bond]

I would think this is the typical internet atheist type.

"A New Hampshire police department has issued a public service announcement with an odd mug shot after a man was arrested with marijuana in his car.

Hampstead police said in a release Monday, "as a public service announcement — it is illegal to possess recreational marijuana in New Hampshire, even if you only 'smoke it in Massachusetts.'"

WMUR-TV reports (Danville man caught with pot in car, police say ) the announcement came after the arrest of 27-year-old Selket Taylor, who was pulled over for using his cellphone while driving.

Police say they arrested Taylor after they saw he had a bag of marijuana in a cup holder.

Taylor has been charged with possession of a controlled drug, transporting a controlled drug in a motor vehicle and use of an electronic mobile device. In his arrest photo, Taylor is sticking out his tongue while his eyes are closed and arms are crossed."

Police issue annoyed press release after pot arrest

If he had a vape pen, then he probably wouldn't been arrested but ticketed over the cell phone use while driving.

 

[BreezeWood]

I would think this is the typical internet atheist type.

who cares what you think ...


and the real culprit

EarthLink - Top News

GOP health plan would be costly for those with coverage gaps

Under the bill, people who go without insurance for even just a couple of months — whether because of a job loss, a divorce, a serious illness that leaves them unable to work, or some other reason — could face sharply higher premiums if they try to sign up again for coverage, especially if they have a pre-existing condition. Some might find themselves priced out of the market.


all the christians want is something for themselves, no matter the cost to others. pretending they do not - "know what they are doing".

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

 

[james bond]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

Great that's your opinion not based on facts logic reason or science.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.

 

[james bond]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.

I said you were wrong agnosticbobo because we're gaining our religion. Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

 

[BreezeWood]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.

I said you were wrong agnosticbobo because we're gaining our religion. Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

.

Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

you might start by defending your own values bond ... the "good folks" might be a little surprised.

you take to seriously, having a little fun.

 

[james bond]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.

I said you were wrong agnosticbobo because we're gaining our religion. Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

.

Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

you might start by defending your own values bond ... the "good folks" might be a little surprised.

you take to seriously, having a little fun.

Unfortunately, it's not fun when people have taken to greed due to seeing all the bling, covetousness seeing all the beautiful women and men, illicit drugs, or the bizarre hedonistic lifestyle that we are all tempted to want. The temptation of the ToK still hasn't gone away. The truth is it was never meant to go away. If Adam and Eve didn't fall, the ToK would've still been there except Cain wouldn't killed Abel. However, we can't deal with alternative endings, we only have now to deal with and atheism and evolution doesn't promote anything but Communism, i.e. corrupt government power leading to mass genocide, the promotion of the Hollywood values or supreme selfishness.

How belief in evolution changes our behavior
"“If there is no Creator, if everything springs ultimately from natural causes, and if this life is all there is, why ought I do/not do certain things, or act/not act in certain ways?”; “If man is merely the latest in a long chain of animals, why should he be viewed as different from any other animal?” These, and other similar questions, inevitably arise from a belief in evolution.

But if a person freely chooses to believe in evolution, what, then, are the implications of that belief? And how does that belief translate into the reality of daily living? Though it is rare to see evolutionists actually admit it, the simple fact of the matter is that belief in evolution produces a society that is not a very pleasant one in which to live. Several years ago, British evolutionist Richard Dawkins [who has described himself as “a fairly militant atheist, with a fair degree of hostility toward religion” (see Bass, 1990, p. 86)] authored a book titled The Selfish Gene, in which he set forth his theory of genetic determinism. In summarizing the basic thesis of the book, Dawkins said: “You are for nothing. You are here to propagate your selfish genes. There is no higher purpose in life” (Bass, 1990, p. 60). Dawkins explained:

I am not advocating a morality based on evolution. I am saying how things have evolved. I am not saying how we humans morally ought to behave.... My own feeling is that a human society based simply on the gene’s law of universal ruthless selfishness would be a very nasty society in which to live. But unfortunately, however much we may deplore something, it does not stop it being true (1989, pp. 2,3, emp. added).
Dawkins is correct in his assessment that a society based on the truthfulness of evolution would be “a very nasty” place to live. But why is this so? The answer has to do with the implications of belief in evolution."

The Implications of Evolution

What floats your boat to the evolutionists out there?

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that before it was a simple yes or no question. Are you or are you not a theist. You either believe or you don't. Then came along agnostics. They allowed people a 3rd option. And then there was light.

People don't realize how many of us out there don't believe in God or at least we don't believe in your religion. In 2015 51% said religion was the answer for most of our problems. Ok so today it's up to 55% but I think if you ask the question in a couple years the % will be under 50%.

Majority in US Still Say Religion Can Answer Most Problems

How religious can the 45% be who answered NO to the question?

Heh. Atheists (which includes agnosticbobo) are wrong again.

If that's your best comeback no wonder we're losing our religion.

This is why Christians have a hard time converting people here. They need to get you alone to privately guilt and fear people into believing. Brainwashing. Make a bad argument here people call you on it.

I said you were wrong agnosticbobo because we're gaining our religion. Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

.

Religion can answer the questions that face us today such as Hollywood values.

you might start by defending your own values bond ... the "good folks" might be a little surprised.

you take to seriously, having a little fun.

Unfortunately, it's not fun when people have taken to greed due to seeing all the bling, covetousness seeing all the beautiful women and men, illicit drugs, or the bizarre hedonistic lifestyle that we are all tempted to want. The temptation of the ToK still hasn't gone away. The truth is it was never meant to go away. If Adam and Eve didn't fall, the ToK would've still been there except Cain wouldn't killed Abel. However, we can't deal with alternative endings, we only have now to deal with and atheism and evolution doesn't promote anything but Communism, i.e. corrupt government power leading to mass genocide, the promotion of the Hollywood values or supreme selfishness.

How belief in evolution changes our behavior
"“If there is no Creator, if everything springs ultimately from natural causes, and if this life is all there is, why ought I do/not do certain things, or act/not act in certain ways?”; “If man is merely the latest in a long chain of animals, why should he be viewed as different from any other animal?” These, and other similar questions, inevitably arise from a belief in evolution.

But if a person freely chooses to believe in evolution, what, then, are the implications of that belief? And how does that belief translate into the reality of daily living? Though it is rare to see evolutionists actually admit it, the simple fact of the matter is that belief in evolution produces a society that is not a very pleasant one in which to live. Several years ago, British evolutionist Richard Dawkins [who has described himself as “a fairly militant atheist, with a fair degree of hostility toward religion” (see Bass, 1990, p. 86)] authored a book titled The Selfish Gene, in which he set forth his theory of genetic determinism. In summarizing the basic thesis of the book, Dawkins said: “You are for nothing. You are here to propagate your selfish genes. There is no higher purpose in life” (Bass, 1990, p. 60). Dawkins explained:

I am not advocating a morality based on evolution. I am saying how things have evolved. I am not saying how we humans morally ought to behave.... My own feeling is that a human society based simply on the gene’s law of universal ruthless selfishness would be a very nasty society in which to live. But unfortunately, however much we may deplore something, it does not stop it being true (1989, pp. 2,3, emp. added).
Dawkins is correct in his assessment that a society based on the truthfulness of evolution would be “a very nasty” place to live. But why is this so? The answer has to do with the implications of belief in evolution."

The Implications of Evolution

What floats your boat to the evolutionists out there?

He said he's not trying to base a morality on religion. Religion is unnecessary as we have secular laws