Questions for Atheists

[Steinlight]

Another thing these "skeptics" can't explain is that if human beings are inherently moral(which really means nothing, as they admit the term is subjective) and rational and don't need religion, why have a State at all, since man is supposedly self-regulating? After all, isn't everything just a preference and how dare you regulate preference bigot my body my choice.


This is where the world of Atheism wonders into the aspie world of anarchism

 

[thebrucebeat]

Organized religion was the foundation for the first civilizations(see Ur). The first agrarian societies were organized by a priestly caste, because organized faith not only unified society(homogeneity is necessary for a socially cohesive society, read Putnam) but formed the basis for a social contract that maintained the order; this social cohesion and the social contract created the conditions that allowed for the advancement(politically, technologically, economically, socially) of human societies . Without these institutions, organized on the premise of religion, humanity would have never advanced beyond hunter gatherer societies.

But of course, spergy shitlib atheists have no concept of social interaction or knowledge of history before 1965.

Your silly vulgar jabs aside, no one has ever made the case that organized religion hasn't had its role in the growth or cohesion of society. That is the very social agreement referred to in my post. Cultures come to agreements about a unified vision and detractors are met with various forms of punishment for not maintaining the status quo.
The veracity of the religious claims is not in any way verified by this. If anything it is undermined by the great variety of faith traditions that are seen across the globe in the growth of societies. The evolution of faith memes as knowledge increases is another blow to the ribs of its truth claims, as it must adapt as the former beliefs are eviscerated by the actual revelation of what is really going on. There are no sun gods, or moon gods, or thunder gods, or lightning gods anymore, because they are unnecessary.
Well, for most of us.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Another thing these "skeptics" can't explain is that if human beings are inherently moral(which really means nothing, as they admit the term is subjective) and rational and don't need religion, why have a State at all, since man is supposedly self-regulating? After all, isn't everything just a preference and how dare you regulate preference bigot my body my choice.


This is where the world of Atheism wonders into the aspie world of anarchism

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

 

[Steinlight]

Organized religion was the foundation for the first civilizations(see Ur). The first agrarian societies were organized by a priestly caste, because organized faith not only unified society(homogeneity is necessary for a socially cohesive society, read Putnam) but formed the basis for a social contract that maintained the order; this social cohesion and the social contract created the conditions that allowed for the advancement(politically, technologically, economically, socially) of human societies . Without these institutions, organized on the premise of religion, humanity would have never advanced beyond hunter gatherer societies.

But of course, spergy shitlib atheists have no concept of social interaction or knowledge of history before 1965.

Your silly vulgar jabs aside, no one has ever made the case that organized religion hasn't had its role in the growth or cohesion of society. That is the very social agreement referred to in my post. Cultures come to agreements about a unified vision and detractors are met with various forms of punishment for not maintaining the status quo.
The veracity of the religious claims is not in any way verified by this. If anything it is undermined by the great variety of faith traditions that are seen across the globe in the growth of societies. The evolution of faith memes as knowledge increases is another blow to the ribs of its truth claims, as it must adapt as the former beliefs are eviscerated by the actual revelation of what is really going on. There are no sun gods, or moon gods, or thunder gods, or lightning gods anymore, because they are unnecessary.
Well, for most of us.

Silly vulgar jabs aside, you are a weenie.

So basically you waste everyone's time by saying what I said in more words. Jesus(sorry should have given you a trigger warning) you are long winded.

This isn't of question of whether religion can be verified by one of your sperglord equations, this is a question of your cognitive dissonance. You on one hand recognize organized faith creating the necessary social cohesion and social contracts for human civilization, but then proclaim it no longer needed because what, the scientific method?

Hate to hurt your feelings and invade the space of your intellectual hugbox, but you atheists are the overwhelming minority. The world rejects your world view, one because your world view is depressing and unhealthy(according to your scientific data, atheists are depressed and emotionally damaged people) and recognize the importance of tradition, community, and something greater beyond themselves. Most people recognize, even if their belief in a higher power can't be scientifically verified beep boop, that preventing social decline into decadence, hedonism, and nihilism is more important than leaving everything to the scientific method. The materialist worldview you ascribe to has led to the worst excesses of humanity, and most don't want celebrate those excesses, well, normal people don't at least.

 

[Steinlight]

Another thing these "skeptics" can't explain is that if human beings are inherently moral(which really means nothing, as they admit the term is subjective) and rational and don't need religion, why have a State at all, since man is supposedly self-regulating? After all, isn't everything just a preference and how dare you regulate preference bigot my body my choice.


This is where the world of Atheism wonders into the aspie world of anarchism

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

 

[thebrucebeat]

Another thing these "skeptics" can't explain is that if human beings are inherently moral(which really means nothing, as they admit the term is subjective) and rational and don't need religion, why have a State at all, since man is supposedly self-regulating? After all, isn't everything just a preference and how dare you regulate preference bigot my body my choice.


This is where the world of Atheism wonders into the aspie world of anarchism

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Organized religion was specifically forbidden as the glue to bind American society as proscribed by the First Amendment. It may not work out in the end, but that's what they wrote.
Blame the dads.
Religion USED to be the tie that binds. The Founders made sure we were bound by no such thing.

 

[Steinlight]

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Organized religion was specifically forbidden as the glue to bind American society as proscribed by the First Amendment. It may not work out in the end, but that's what they wrote.
Blame the dads.
Religion USED to be the tie that binds. The Founders made sure we were bound by no such thing.

LOL, it is so specifically forbidden, that every president has sworn to God on the Bible to honor our Constitution. The Founders were vigilante in their pozzed pursuit of sciencey Atheism.

Apparently you are privy to a different interpretation of the Constitution than the rest of us. Where does it say in the first amendment that "organized religion is forbidden to bind American Society"?

Get the ACLU on this shit. Atheist goons are getting pissed. Close Salvation Army and every Christian charity this instant. The Constitution prohibits this, Oh my Dawkins!.

 

[Moonglow]

Another thing these "skeptics" can't explain is that if human beings are inherently moral(which really means nothing, as they admit the term is subjective) and rational and don't need religion, why have a State at all, since man is supposedly self-regulating? After all, isn't everything just a preference and how dare you regulate preference bigot my body my choice.


This is where the world of Atheism wonders into the aspie world of anarchism

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Wars of religion were moral also...

 

[Steinlight]

The State is the mechanism where the agreement is codified and desceminated.
Can you point out anyone's post that said man is "self-regulating"? I haven't seen that.
The rest of your post is such a grammatical disaster it is impossible to respond to.

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Wars of religion were moral also...

LOL, this is the ridiculous train of thought that goes along the dipshit hippy line of pushed by john lennon, "that without religion, we would have no war man". Well, not only is that absurd, it ignores the plethora of political and economic causes behind wars throughout history. It also ignores the fact, that without religion, humanity would have cannibalized itself and no civilization would have never existed.

 

[thebrucebeat]

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Organized religion was specifically forbidden as the glue to bind American society as proscribed by the First Amendment. It may not work out in the end, but that's what they wrote.
Blame the dads.
Religion USED to be the tie that binds. The Founders made sure we were bound by no such thing.

LOL, it is so specifically forbidden, that every president has sworn to God on the Bible to honor our Constitution. The Founders were vigilante in their pozzed pursuit of sciencey Atheism.

Apparently you are privy to a different interpretation of the Constitution than the rest of us. Where does it say in the first amendment that "organized religion is forbidden to bind American Society"?

Get the ACLU on this shit. Atheist goons are getting pissed. Close Salvation Army and every Christian charity this instant. The Constitution prohibits this, Oh my Dawkins!.

What do those instutions have to do with federal government?
You earn todays dunce cap!
What is your "interpretation" of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the COTUS?

 

[Steinlight]

Organized religion was specifically forbidden as the glue to bind American society as proscribed by the First Amendment. It may not work out in the end, but that's what they wrote.
Blame the dads.
Religion USED to be the tie that binds. The Founders made sure we were bound by no such thing.

LOL, it is so specifically forbidden, that every president has sworn to God on the Bible to honor our Constitution. The Founders were vigilante in their pozzed pursuit of sciencey Atheism.

Apparently you are privy to a different interpretation of the Constitution than the rest of us. Where does it say in the first amendment that "organized religion is forbidden to bind American Society"?

Get the ACLU on this shit. Atheist goons are getting pissed. Close Salvation Army and every Christian charity this instant. The Constitution prohibits this, Oh my Dawkins!.

What do those instutions have to do with federal government?
You earn todays dunce cap!
What is your "interpretation" of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the COTUS?

This is the problem in the mind of the left, the state is the society in your view. It fits your State-Worship ideology. The progressive state has replaced the Church as the moral arbiter, with a doctrine of objective relativism.

A state church does not necessarily equal a society bound by a common faith. Learn the difference.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm no fan of government and no fan of religion either.

I am best described as an agnostic with atheistic tendencies.

The idea that one who does not believe in god or some eternal reward for good behavior cannot have personal morality is ridiculous.

 

[Crystalclear]

This thread is full of horse crap. People do know what can and cannot be done. Morals do also exist without religion. What the hell is wrong with you for thinking that it is normal to rape groups of people if there is no God?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I wonder about the psyches of people who need the threat of eternal damnation as a motivator for good behavior.

 

[Steinlight]

I'm no fan of government and no fan of religion either.

I am best described as an agnostic with atheistic tendencies.

The idea that one who does not believe in god or some eternal reward for good behavior cannot have personal morality is ridiculous.

You don't understand the foundations of your personal morality

Very few will go along with your libertarian view of a social free for all. It is unpractical, anti-social, and would be corrosive to society at large if implemented.

 

[Steinlight]

This thread is full of horse crap. People do know what can and cannot be done. Morals do also exist without religion. What the hell is wrong with you for thinking that it is normal to rape groups of people if there is no God?

Nice way of not answering the questions...

 

[Moonglow]

The state wouldn't exist without organized religion, organized religion is the moral code that binds society.

So man isn't "moral" and rational, egad, what about science and the enlightenment goon sir? You just want to replace the Church with the State, that has worked out well. State worship has worked out so well, look at North Korea

Wars of religion were moral also...

LOL, this is the ridiculous train of thought that goes along the dipshit hippy line of pushed by john lennon, "that without religion, we would have no war man". Well, not only is that absurd, it ignores the plethora of political and economic causes behind wars throughout history. It also ignores the fact, that without religion, humanity would have cannibalized itself and no civilization would have never existed.

Like the protestant/catholic wars when they killed each other over, the same religion.

 

[thebrucebeat]

LOL, it is so specifically forbidden, that every president has sworn to God on the Bible to honor our Constitution. The Founders were vigilante in their pozzed pursuit of sciencey Atheism.

Apparently you are privy to a different interpretation of the Constitution than the rest of us. Where does it say in the first amendment that "organized religion is forbidden to bind American Society"?

Get the ACLU on this shit. Atheist goons are getting pissed. Close Salvation Army and every Christian charity this instant. The Constitution prohibits this, Oh my Dawkins!.

What do those instutions have to do with federal government?
You earn todays dunce cap!
What is your "interpretation" of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the COTUS?

This is the problem in the mind of the left, the state is the society in your view. It fits your State-Worship ideology. The progressive state has replaced the Church as the moral arbiter, with a doctrine of objective relativism.

A state church does not necessarily equal a society bound by a common faith. Learn the difference.

And for that reason I know no one that worships the state.
The state is a tool, a methodology for allowing as much freedom as possible and maintain some kind of civic order.
You are free in our system to believe any silliness you like, secular or religious. You can't expect it to be enforced, however.
No establishment, no interference with free exercise.
Pretty simple.

 

[Steinlight]

Wars of religion were moral also...

LOL, this is the ridiculous train of thought that goes along the dipshit hippy line of pushed by john lennon, "that without religion, we would have no war man". Well, not only is that absurd, it ignores the plethora of political and economic causes behind wars throughout history. It also ignores the fact, that without religion, humanity would have cannibalized itself and no civilization would have never existed.

Like the protestant/catholic wars when they killed each other over, the same religion.

Like the Soviet Gulags, or North Korean prison Camps. You really don't want to go toe to toe on death tolls here.

And it doesn't even matter that there were wars predicated on religion.

Religion is the foundation of a cohesive society, without it, you faggots wouldn't have a civil society in which you have the leisure the discuss how the world would have no wars if they embraced "muh atheism".

 

[Steinlight]

What do those instutions have to do with federal government?
You earn todays dunce cap!
What is your "interpretation" of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the COTUS?

This is the problem in the mind of the left, the state is the society in your view. It fits your State-Worship ideology. The progressive state has replaced the Church as the moral arbiter, with a doctrine of objective relativism.

A state church does not necessarily equal a society bound by a common faith. Learn the difference.

And for that reason I know no one that worships the state.
The state is a tool, a methodology for allowing as much freedom as possible and maintain some kind of civic order.
You are free in our system to believe any silliness you like, secular or religious. You can't expect it to be enforced, however.
No establishment, no interference with free exercise.
Pretty simple.

Yes you do, through your words, you clearly think state=society. You have shown don't understand the concept that organized religion can bind communities together independent of the state, even in the face of a hostile secular state(see Orthodox Christian communities in the USSR).

Sorry, I don't endorse your dystopian state where maximum "freedom" comes before "some kind of civic order". Buzzwords like freedom allow people to veil their ignorance in feel good platitudes while society rots from the inside out. How about instead of having a society in which we "do what we want as long as we don't hurt others" that promotes atomization, separation, community breakdown, and moral relativism, our older generation, we promote the notion to not only not hurt others but also to not hurt ourselves by discouraging anti-social behavior.

Your hyper-individualist ethic fails to recognize individuals can't exist independent of a society. Human relations are the smallest atom of society, not the individual. You cannot have a one man society.