If There Is No God, Murder Is Not Wrong

[emilynghiem]

I don't think that is what Weatherman2020 means at all.

It is the literal equivalent of what he is saying. He comes to the conclusion that, if no god, then murder is not wrong. There is no getting around that.

Now, Can you or can you not see how a person mind find that utterly immoral and shameful?

Sure but Weatherman2020's way of saying it is
* if you rely on manmade laws, then all it takes is passing a law making murder legal and then it's okay by manmade laws
* so W is saying that respect for higher laws (which Christians call God's laws) having authority, DESPITE the relative laws of man that may or may not be consistent, is still the superior authority as opposed to relying on whatever man passes and establishes through govt by the secular system of defining right and wrong

You are BOTH right.
NOBODY should rely on manmade systems on external religions or secular govt to tell us if murder is wrong.

I think Weatherman2020 is questioning what do nontheists use as their moral compass if they don't believe there is a universal moral law for all people that is inherent independent of secular govt or systems?

again I'm saying there IS a universal truth/law governing all humanity.

But no, it isn't a requirement to express God's/universal laws using only Biblical traditions.

As long as we are citing the same laws and authority/spirit of truth/justice, then the language can be relative as long as we are talking about the same things.

NOTE: in both cases, NO we don't rely on the LANGUAGE or "religious/political systems"

In both cases, both you and W are referring to invoking and enforcing the universal laws that are true for all people. You and I don't think this relies on calling it "God" and W doesn't think nontheists have this same understanding of universal laws but thinks such people rely on secular govt and manmade laws to tell them right and wrong instead of invoking the same universal authority of justice and truth that Christians are referring to

 

[diver52]

If there is no God, murder isn't wrong. You may think it's wrong, but how do you know it's wrong? As Dennis Prager explains, without God, all morality is mere opinion.

Thank you for the glimpse into your horrible morality. You only think murder is wrong because you are told to think it is wrong. That's special.

Your morality is equal to Charles Manson’s.

Sorry, that makes no sense. You are the one telling everyone you only believe murder is wrong because you want to save your own, imaginary soul. How immoral.

Of course simple logic makes no sense to you. That’s why you’re into socialism and communism.

YOU don’t set the rules on morality. I do. No, Joe does. Mary says she does.

Who sets the rules?

The community does.

 

[emilynghiem]

If there is no God, murder isn't wrong. You may think it's wrong, but how do you know it's wrong? As Dennis Prager explains, without God, all morality is mere opinion.

Thank you for the glimpse into your horrible morality. You only think murder is wrong because you are told to think it is wrong. That's special.

Your morality is equal to Charles Manson’s.

Sorry, that makes no sense. You are the one telling everyone you only believe murder is wrong because you want to save your own, imaginary soul. How immoral.

Of course simple logic makes no sense to you. That’s why you’re into socialism and communism.

YOU don’t set the rules on morality. I do. No, Joe does. Mary says she does.

Who sets the rules?

The community does.

Yes and no diver52
Yes individuals and the collective community have to
CONSENT to social agreements on terms, contracts and laws/policies
in order to decide and enforce them democratically.

But there is STILL a natural law and process governing the people
that is INHERENT by our human nature.

Thus the NATURAL self-existent RIGHTS that people have
IN ADDITION to the community consenting to establish and enforce these.

Like freedom of speech, free choice of beliefs, these are principles
people have naturally by how the human will and conscience works.

So YES it is in conjunction with the community CONSENTING and
democratically AGREEING on principles, policies and process.

But that process is still governed by naturally existing laws
and relations that operate through our conscience, both as individuals
and as collective members of society and humanity influencing each other.

It's BOTH, both the community will and the inherent principles
and process that govern us by nature, especially where policies
affect BOTH individuals and collective groups, so neither should
oppress or violate the rights and consent of the other, or such
imposition DISRUPTS the democratic process and community.

That is just "natural law" that governs our interactions, and it is
up to individuals and community to come to terms with this natural
democratic process, to work with it, not against it. We don't make up
or create the basis of natural laws, but we communicate and establish
them with our "man made" systems of secular/civil or religious principles.

Each community uses its local language or laws to communicate and
agree among its members. But the underlying, inherent principles
that govern human nature, which man did not create, drive this process.

 

[emilynghiem]

Here Weatherman2020 and cc: G.T. and Fort Fun Indiana
Will this help delineate the difference that W2020 is trying to make
between believing in a higher universal preexisting authority of law
vs. depending on just man made relative laws and rules on right and wrong/morality:

The idea in Jeremiah 29:11"For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord,
plans to prosper you, and not to harm you. Plans to give you hope and a future."

What this means is faith in a higher God means faith that there are higher plans "already in place" that are BETTER than man's limited perception which is biased toward fear and doubt.

So if people are motivated by vision and faith in a HIGHER purpose and path/direction
that "all things in life, even bad situations" are heading toward,
that would make people act differently to SOLVE problems WITH FAITH that there is a
BETTER OUTCOME already in store that the process is heading toward.
Such people with FAITH in a higher truth or justice coming out of injustice and adversity
would have GREATER motivation to forgive and resolve past issues in order to move forward to a better future.

While people only looking at it from man's limited perception might fight and give up.
Might blame and stay stuck in the past, and not be able to move forward with faith.

====

IMPORTANT NOTE:
The number one complaint I hear from nonchristians is that CHRISTIANS don't even follow this. Yes, it is a common struggle to put the future IDEAL solution above and before our "man made" perceptions that are biased negative to obstruct, deny and project blame instead of "forgiving and receiving correction from God" as Christian preach and claim to believe in. Even Christians fail like anyone else to have this higher faith, so that causes even more rejection and conflict.

So even and especially where CHRISTIANS fail in this higher faith, and project blame onto nonbelievers for not having such faith, that is CRITICAL to go back to this idea that there is a higher purpose and direction (in all things even these conflicts by man made problems), and invoke THAT instead of staying stuck.

Weatherman2020 if this HIGHER FAITH is what you are referring to,
YES it is superior. But it isn't just the atheists or secular nonchristians that lack this faith.
Even where Theists and Christians lose sight of God's higher laws and purpose,
all people fail in this. So it is only fair to blame Christians equally as nonbelievers
for putting our manmade laws, rules and projected plans above the greater good and laws
that are more fair and inclusive of all people equally. Christians do the same thing.

 

[G.T.]

Here Weatherman2020 and cc: G.T. and Fort Fun Indiana
Will this help delineate the difference that W2020 is trying to make
between believing in a higher universal preexisting authority of law
vs. depending on just man made relative laws and rules on right and wrong/morality:

The idea in Jeremiah 29:11"For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord,
plans to prosper you, and not to harm you. Plans to give you hope and a future."

What this means is faith in a higher God means faith that there are higher plans "already in place" that are BETTER than man's limited perception which is biased toward fear and doubt.

So if people are motivated by vision and faith in a HIGHER purpose and path/direction
that "all things in life, even bad situations" are heading toward,
that would make people act differently to SOLVE problems WITH FAITH that there is a
BETTER OUTCOME already in store that the process is heading toward.
Such people with FAITH in a higher truth or justice coming out of injustice and adversity
would have GREATER motivation to forgive and resolve past issues in order to move forward to a better future.

While people only looking at it from man's limited perception might fight and give up.
Might blame and stay stuck in the past, and not be able to move forward with faith.

i have 0% interest in propaganda based on psychotic delusions or gullibility, which is what religion is. Sorry, no dice.

 

[22lcidw]

To be clear I am agnostic, not atheist. That being said I don't need a God to tell me that taking life from another human unnecessarily is wrong. Morality being constructed by humans doesn't bother me. It doesn't make it less relevant or meaningful to me. What kind of person needs divine guidance to not be a murderer?

It's not divine guidance the OP was talking about...it's divine punishment. In other words, he admits that those with a god ONLY behave because they are afraid of a hell after death or karma during.

There are things that can help to keep people in line. Belief in God is one of them. I would consider no hell to be a boost for screwing over the next guy. Not that that means it would happen for those inclined to not have a faith. But screwing over people would be at a higher percentage today.

 

[diver52]

Thank you for the glimpse into your horrible morality. You only think murder is wrong because you are told to think it is wrong. That's special.

Your morality is equal to Charles Manson’s.

Sorry, that makes no sense. You are the one telling everyone you only believe murder is wrong because you want to save your own, imaginary soul. How immoral.

Of course simple logic makes no sense to you. That’s why you’re into socialism and communism.

YOU don’t set the rules on morality. I do. No, Joe does. Mary says she does.

Who sets the rules?

The community does.

Yes and no diver52
Yes individuals and the collective community have to
CONSENT to social agreements on terms, contracts and laws/policies
in order to decide and enforce them democratically.

But there is STILL a natural law and process governing the people
that is INHERENT by our human nature.

Thus the NATURAL self-existent RIGHTS that people have
IN ADDITION to the community consenting to establish and enforce these.

Like freedom of speech, free choice of beliefs, these are principles
people have naturally by how the human will and conscience works.

So YES it is in conjunction with the community CONSENTING and
democratically AGREEING on principles, policies and process.

But that process is still governed by naturally existing laws
and relations that operate through our conscience, both as individuals
and as collective members of society and humanity influencing each other.

It's BOTH, both the community will and the inherent principles
and process that govern us by nature, especially where policies
affect BOTH individuals and collective groups, so neither should
oppress or violate the rights and consent of the other, or such
imposition DISRUPTS the democratic process and community.

That is just "natural law" that governs our interactions, and it is
up to individuals and community to come to terms with this natural
democratic process, to work with it, not against it. We don't make up
or create the basis of natural laws, but we communicate and establish
them with our "man made" systems of secular/civil or religious principles.

Each community uses its local language or laws to communicate and
agree among its members. But the underlying, inherent principles
that govern human nature, which man did not create, drive this process.

There is no such thing as natural law. That's just a pretty myth. All laws derive from the society, without exception.

 

[Taz]

Weatherman2020
Where are people like you GETTING THIS FROM
that without belief in a PERSONIFIED GOD then anything goes?

Wouldn't the laws of SCIENCE and MATH work consistently
REGARDLESS if you believe "gravity" or "physics" was
"created by a God figure" or if you believe the world ALWAYS
existed without beginning or end, but is just SELF EXISTENT?

I don't get this.

What if GOD means the whole UNIVERSE and ALL EXISTENCE
ALWAYS EXISTED? What if it means the LAWS of LIFE
and NATURE are ETERNAL and will ALWAYS be.

Can't that occur with God not being limited to a personified figure
but God possibly being ALL creation/universe as self-existing and eternal?

So as long as people including Buddhists, Atheists and Naturalists
believe in the SAME UNIVERSAL LAWS governing humanity
and the world/universe (which Christians/Theists call God's laws),
why can't we all agree to follow the same laws
REGARDLESS if we describe the SOURCE of these laws
as a personified God figure or central source, or if
we attribute "God" to mean LIFE/CREATION itself.

Wouldn't the universal laws of nature and creation
still operate the same way? And why can't we agree on
those laws even if we frame God in different ways as the source
of naturally existing laws?

???

If there is no God, murder isn't wrong. You may think it's wrong, but how do you know it's wrong? As Dennis Prager explains, without God, all morality is mere opinion.

If there is no higher authority, then everyone’s morality is equal. If you say government is the higher authority, I can point to dozens of governments where it was perfectly acceptable to drag you out of your bed, shoot you and rape your daughters.

If you can’t grasp that simple logic then you need to ponder it some more.

Your logic is incoherent.

If morality is merely what humans have created as their best system to advance well-being, then there are objective right and wrong answers using cause and effect analysis to determine the best moral systems.

That's also indicative in reality, and not just philosophically - as we evolve, previously accepted morals have become barbaric, or extinct. That's due to a better cause/effect analysis, as it pertains to well-being.

It's pretty simple shit.

You'll never be the toughest guy on earth...therefore, it's probably not a good idea to let folks Murder, because it would damage your own well-being.

From there, it's a logical chain of "morals" that becomes self evident, in nature alone. No God needed but in FACT, the "God" of the bible is not trust-worthy, as he's ordered genocide, rape, baby killing etc. in one "covenant" and changed his mind in the next. His morals are subjective, not universal or unchanging...and they're also pretty abhorrent, at that.

Secular society has caused almost ALL religions to, COUGH, "reinterpret" their scriptures as we've evolved to thinking that their past interpretations were Barbaric. That's history, fingers in your ears.

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I use that argument to offer to anti-nontheists
if God is supreme planner in charge of all things and how they are created and work together,
wouldn't atheists and other nontheists be created that way on purpose?

Thats not an argument. That is a conditional statement. To use it in an argument, you must first assume as true that god is real and is the aupreme planner. So, surely you can see that is not a compelling argument for an atheist.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Sure but Weatherman2020's way of saying it is
* if you rely on manmade laws, then all it takes is passing a law making murder legal and then it's okay by manmade laws

No he isnt. That is a blatant and intentional misrepresentation of what he is saying, and i will not let your attempt at a cheap parlor trick stand.

He is not saying it would "not be illegal". He is saying it woyld not be WRONG. Please chuck out that entire post and start over.

Now,if you would like to argue that, without religion, murder would not be illegal, knock yourself out. If so, you are wrong, and you will quickly lose that argument.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Weatherman2020
Where are people like you GETTING THIS FROM
that without belief in a PERSONIFIED GOD then anything goes?

Wouldn't the laws of SCIENCE and MATH work consistently
REGARDLESS if you believe "gravity" or "physics" was
"created by a God figure" or if you believe the world ALWAYS
existed without beginning or end, but is just SELF EXISTENT?

I don't get this.

What if GOD means the whole UNIVERSE and ALL EXISTENCE
ALWAYS EXISTED? What if it means the LAWS of LIFE
and NATURE are ETERNAL and will ALWAYS be.

Can't that occur with God not being limited to a personified figure
but God possibly being ALL creation/universe as self-existing and eternal?

So as long as people including Buddhists, Atheists and Naturalists
believe in the SAME UNIVERSAL LAWS governing humanity
and the world/universe (which Christians/Theists call God's laws),
why can't we all agree to follow the same laws
REGARDLESS if we describe the SOURCE of these laws
as a personified God figure or central source, or if
we attribute "God" to mean LIFE/CREATION itself.

Wouldn't the universal laws of nature and creation
still operate the same way? And why can't we agree on
those laws even if we frame God in different ways as the source
of naturally existing laws?

???

If there is no God, murder isn't wrong. You may think it's wrong, but how do you know it's wrong? As Dennis Prager explains, without God, all morality is mere opinion.

If there is no higher authority, then everyone’s morality is equal. If you say government is the higher authority, I can point to dozens of governments where it was perfectly acceptable to drag you out of your bed, shoot you and rape your daughters.

If you can’t grasp that simple logic then you need to ponder it some more.

Your logic is incoherent.

If morality is merely what humans have created as their best system to advance well-being, then there are objective right and wrong answers using cause and effect analysis to determine the best moral systems.

That's also indicative in reality, and not just philosophically - as we evolve, previously accepted morals have become barbaric, or extinct. That's due to a better cause/effect analysis, as it pertains to well-being.

It's pretty simple shit.

You'll never be the toughest guy on earth...therefore, it's probably not a good idea to let folks Murder, because it would damage your own well-being.

From there, it's a logical chain of "morals" that becomes self evident, in nature alone. No God needed but in FACT, the "God" of the bible is not trust-worthy, as he's ordered genocide, rape, baby killing etc. in one "covenant" and changed his mind in the next. His morals are subjective, not universal or unchanging...and they're also pretty abhorrent, at that.

Secular society has caused almost ALL religions to, COUGH, "reinterpret" their scriptures as we've evolved to thinking that their past interpretations were Barbaric. That's history, fingers in your ears.

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

 

[G.T.]

Weatherman2020
Where are people like you GETTING THIS FROM
that without belief in a PERSONIFIED GOD then anything goes?

Wouldn't the laws of SCIENCE and MATH work consistently
REGARDLESS if you believe "gravity" or "physics" was
"created by a God figure" or if you believe the world ALWAYS
existed without beginning or end, but is just SELF EXISTENT?

I don't get this.

What if GOD means the whole UNIVERSE and ALL EXISTENCE
ALWAYS EXISTED? What if it means the LAWS of LIFE
and NATURE are ETERNAL and will ALWAYS be.

Can't that occur with God not being limited to a personified figure
but God possibly being ALL creation/universe as self-existing and eternal?

So as long as people including Buddhists, Atheists and Naturalists
believe in the SAME UNIVERSAL LAWS governing humanity
and the world/universe (which Christians/Theists call God's laws),
why can't we all agree to follow the same laws
REGARDLESS if we describe the SOURCE of these laws
as a personified God figure or central source, or if
we attribute "God" to mean LIFE/CREATION itself.

Wouldn't the universal laws of nature and creation
still operate the same way? And why can't we agree on
those laws even if we frame God in different ways as the source
of naturally existing laws?

???

If there is no higher authority, then everyone’s morality is equal. If you say government is the higher authority, I can point to dozens of governments where it was perfectly acceptable to drag you out of your bed, shoot you and rape your daughters.

If you can’t grasp that simple logic then you need to ponder it some more.

Your logic is incoherent.

If morality is merely what humans have created as their best system to advance well-being, then there are objective right and wrong answers using cause and effect analysis to determine the best moral systems.

That's also indicative in reality, and not just philosophically - as we evolve, previously accepted morals have become barbaric, or extinct. That's due to a better cause/effect analysis, as it pertains to well-being.

It's pretty simple shit.

You'll never be the toughest guy on earth...therefore, it's probably not a good idea to let folks Murder, because it would damage your own well-being.

From there, it's a logical chain of "morals" that becomes self evident, in nature alone. No God needed but in FACT, the "God" of the bible is not trust-worthy, as he's ordered genocide, rape, baby killing etc. in one "covenant" and changed his mind in the next. His morals are subjective, not universal or unchanging...and they're also pretty abhorrent, at that.

Secular society has caused almost ALL religions to, COUGH, "reinterpret" their scriptures as we've evolved to thinking that their past interpretations were Barbaric. That's history, fingers in your ears.

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Sure but Weatherman2020's way of saying it is
* if you rely on manmade laws, then all it takes is passing a law making murder legal and then it's okay by manmade laws

No he isnt. That is a blatant and intentional misrepresentation of what he is saying, and i will not let your attempt at a cheap parlor trick stand.

He is not saying it would "not be illegal". He is saying it woyld not be WRONG. Please chuck out that entire post and start over.

Now,if you would like to argue that, without religion, murder would not be illegal, knock yourself out. If so, you are wrong, and you will quickly lose that argument.

You can’t grasp the concept that people in the world think differently than you. You’re a stereotypical leftist who lives in a sealed bubble world with no concept of how the world works.

Too bad we can’t drop you into North Korea to experience morality they consider superior to what your feeble mind can grasp.

 

[Weatherman2020]

If there is no higher authority, then everyone’s morality is equal. If you say government is the higher authority, I can point to dozens of governments where it was perfectly acceptable to drag you out of your bed, shoot you and rape your daughters.

If you can’t grasp that simple logic then you need to ponder it some more.

Your logic is incoherent.

If morality is merely what humans have created as their best system to advance well-being, then there are objective right and wrong answers using cause and effect analysis to determine the best moral systems.

That's also indicative in reality, and not just philosophically - as we evolve, previously accepted morals have become barbaric, or extinct. That's due to a better cause/effect analysis, as it pertains to well-being.

It's pretty simple shit.

You'll never be the toughest guy on earth...therefore, it's probably not a good idea to let folks Murder, because it would damage your own well-being.

From there, it's a logical chain of "morals" that becomes self evident, in nature alone. No God needed but in FACT, the "God" of the bible is not trust-worthy, as he's ordered genocide, rape, baby killing etc. in one "covenant" and changed his mind in the next. His morals are subjective, not universal or unchanging...and they're also pretty abhorrent, at that.

Secular society has caused almost ALL religions to, COUGH, "reinterpret" their scriptures as we've evolved to thinking that their past interpretations were Barbaric. That's history, fingers in your ears.

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

 

[G.T.]

Your logic is incoherent.

If morality is merely what humans have created as their best system to advance well-being, then there are objective right and wrong answers using cause and effect analysis to determine the best moral systems.

That's also indicative in reality, and not just philosophically - as we evolve, previously accepted morals have become barbaric, or extinct. That's due to a better cause/effect analysis, as it pertains to well-being.

It's pretty simple shit.

You'll never be the toughest guy on earth...therefore, it's probably not a good idea to let folks Murder, because it would damage your own well-being.

From there, it's a logical chain of "morals" that becomes self evident, in nature alone. No God needed but in FACT, the "God" of the bible is not trust-worthy, as he's ordered genocide, rape, baby killing etc. in one "covenant" and changed his mind in the next. His morals are subjective, not universal or unchanging...and they're also pretty abhorrent, at that.

Secular society has caused almost ALL religions to, COUGH, "reinterpret" their scriptures as we've evolved to thinking that their past interpretations were Barbaric. That's history, fingers in your ears.

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

No...science and logic say that societies based on individual freedoms do the best, and allowing murder is antithetical to that.

Next.


Also, my wife's hotter anyhow.

 

[Weatherman2020]

There you go. Morality is OK when it’s defined by YOU. But YOU are just one voice of 3 BILLION voices.

Your inability to grasp the basic logic of who’s going to set rules for behavior is troubling for society. It’s why we are seeing a resurgence of advocates for communism and socialism. You can’t learn basic principles.

Let me help you.

Jeffry Dahmer is just as moral as Mother Teresa if there is no God. Fact. No dancing around it.

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

No...science and logic say that societies based on individual freedoms do the best, and allowing murder is antithetical to that.

Next.


Also, my wife's hotter anyhow.

Oh please. Go to 5th grade and learn how evolution works.

 

[G.T.]

Atheists can be very moral. Now you know.

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

No...science and logic say that societies based on individual freedoms do the best, and allowing murder is antithetical to that.

Next.


Also, my wife's hotter anyhow.

Oh please. Go to 5th grade and learn how evolution works.

Evolution is how we developed science, and logic. Evolution is why we are communal, because in a pack you're more survivable. Evolution is learning that packs stay together most effectively with ethical systems. Science has taught us cause and effect analysis to determine the best ethics.

You're a retard that needs a bronze aged book to teach you the common fucking sense reasons that sentient beings develop ethical systems.

Thats just disturbed. Do you drool?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Straw man, nobody said they couldn’t.

The fact of the OP is that the morality going on inside North Korea is just as valid as anything you like if there is no God as a higher authority over us mere humans.

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

No...science and logic say that societies based on individual freedoms do the best, and allowing murder is antithetical to that.

Next.


Also, my wife's hotter anyhow.

Oh please. Go to 5th grade and learn how evolution works.

Evolution is how we developed science, and logic. Evolution is why we are communal, because in a pack you're more survivable. Evolution is learning that packs stay together most effectively with ethical systems. Science has taught us cause and effect analysis.

You're a retard that needs a bronze aged book to teach you the common fucking sense reasons that sentient beings develop ethical systems.

Thats just disturbed. Do you drool?

Science and logic are not human inventions. I know that’s a monumental slam to your bubble world, but contemplate it in your next yoga session.

 

[mdk]

My husband is hotter. Sorry.

 

[G.T.]

False. Theres no reason you cannot use logic and science to determine which moral systems work best...whereas your fake sky pixie fruit boy is a genocidal maniac. Your moral compass is hitler/pol pot worship, but times tens of millions. And animals.

Science and logic says it’s best for you to put a bullet in my head because my wife is hotter than yours and will produce superior offspring.

No...science and logic say that societies based on individual freedoms do the best, and allowing murder is antithetical to that.

Next.


Also, my wife's hotter anyhow.

Oh please. Go to 5th grade and learn how evolution works.

Evolution is how we developed science, and logic. Evolution is why we are communal, because in a pack you're more survivable. Evolution is learning that packs stay together most effectively with ethical systems. Science has taught us cause and effect analysis.

You're a retard that needs a bronze aged book to teach you the common fucking sense reasons that sentient beings develop ethical systems.

Thats just disturbed. Do you drool?

Science and logic are not human inventions. I know that’s a monumental slam to your bubble world, but contemplate it in your next yoga session.

Science and logic are definitely human inventions. What a fucking retarded thing to say