🌟 Exclusive 2024 Prime Day Deals! 🌟

Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁

What Is The Biggest Drawback Of Atheism?

6595f8233d76cf1d430234cbc78ab358.jpg
 
Ten Commandments have little to do with our laws

Our laws do a better job at protecting human rights than the Ten Commandments

Atheists are usually wrong.

"Over the last two decades, monuments to the Ten Commandments have been removed, often via court orders – and often under protest – from state capitols, parks, and even public schools in Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Alabama, Ohio, Mississippi, New Mexico, Maryland, and Kentucky."

The Ten Commandments and Natural Law - The Catholic Thing
God did not have his best day when he made the Ten Commandments
I could have done better and I am not even a deity

What I would include in my Ten Commandments

1. Thou shall not allow slavery. Moses led the Hebrews out of slavery and struggled to free them. Yet God does not even prohibit slavery in his ten commandments. I would prohibit slavery and order employers to pay an honest wage and order workers to give an honest days work

2. Thou shall be clean in thy person and thy environment. God could have saved hundreds of millions of lives with this one. Sanitation was a major killer of mankind. Keep yourself clean to avoid germs. Do not pollute your drinking water or your environment. Could have prevented the plague and other killer diseases

3. Thou shall not engage in War. War is a practice of man and not God. God should encourage peaceful resolution of conflicts and consider war an act against God

4. Thou shall educate yourself and others. A critical trait of man. Learning and the spread of knowledge. You should strive to learn your whole life and spread knowledge to others

5. I would expand the honor your father and mother to honor your family. Parents should honor their kids, make sure they are fed and clothed and protected. You should work hard to take care of your family
 
As I said before, you can use any tool. My two suggestions were governing laws and Dr. Suess books. Leaving each individual to determine his own moral authority is dysfunctional. This decayed type of society is to be avoided.

It doesn't have to be based on a false messiah. It can be based on anything. It can't be based on an arbitrary concept such as intellect or reason.

Are we seeing your true colors now? Did you miss my post #454 on p.23?

Jesus is the TRUE Messiah. He has fulfilled the prophecies. God provides the objective moral values -- The Bible and

The_Ten_Commandments-583284878-large.jpg


See how nothing travels faster than the speed of light? Atheists can't do that, but have tried to claim that like their morality based on rationalism and human laws. In fact our laws in the US are based on the above.
.
Jesus is the TRUE Messiah. He has fulfilled the prophecies. God provides the objective moral values -- The Bible and


there is no proof the Almighty had anything to do with it - except abstention.

jesus left nothing to prosperity nor did those around him preserve any artifact from them to verify a single event or proof of a subject matter related to their presence that is latter referred to in the 4th century as a messiah.

that is all there is to christianity, a book written and edited for a century, 4 centuries after the fact.

compared to a valid secular humanism, yours is a fantasy fairy tale at best - that historically has persecuted and victimized the innocent - you are who is guilty of not seeking the truth, true moral values.
 
Darwin had nothing to do with it

Hatred and persecution of Jews dates back to early Christianity

I doubt your last sentence.

Darwin had everything to do with giving Hitler justification. He and his cousin became Hitler's heroes.
I'm afraid you're simply reiterating a lot of slurs that are a staple of the really angry, fundamentalist Christian ministries.

It's really shameful that angry, fundamentalist Christians still promote such falsehoods.

I'm not angry. These are some hard truths that Darwinin's racism influenced socialDarwinism, Herbert Spencer, his cousin Francis Galton and eugenics, Aryan supremacy, and Hitler.

Hitler wrote about evolution in Mein Kampf -- Did Hitler Use the Term "Evolution" in Mein Kampf? | Evolution News.

The Darwin connections to Hitler are serious -- - Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust -

Even the evolution apologists admit racist Darwin influenced Hitler via Ernst Haeckel, another serious racist. Haeckel's the one who read Darwin's book and made up his embryo drawings which fooled an entire generation.

http://home.uchicago.edu/~rjr6/articles/Was Hitler a Darwinian.pdf

From Quora (which leans left):

Instead of the typical biased research and answers:

What would Darwin think about Hitler?

Gwydion Madawc Williams, Read a lot about them
"Unknown. He believed in racial inequality, and was comfortable about the notion of inferior peoples being replaced:

“Competition was not between individuals, but the groups themselves. The hardiest races with the greatest ingenuity and cooperation would prevail, while the struggle ‘leads to the inevitable extinction of all those low and mentally undeveloped with which the European come into contract’. This Darwin could agree with; he marked the passage heavily. Imperial expansion from the north was wiping out the indigenous tribes. The Beagle voyage had shown him as much. He scribbled at the top of the page: ‘natural selection is now acting on the inferior races when put into competition with the New Zealanders – high New Zealanders (sic)
say the [Maori] race dying out like their own native rat’.” (Desmond, Adrian & Moore, James. Darwin. Michael Joseph (Penguin Group) 1991. Page 521. Emphasis added.)

He didn’t approve of slavery: that was seen as cruelty to inferior humans, and I think he also disapproved of cruelty to animals.

A lot of the British ruling class approved of Hitler until he broke the Munich Agreement by taking the Czech half of Czechoslovakia. The degree of approval gets covered up. Unless you are on the Hard Left, you will probably not know that the Daily Mail was pro-Hitler for many years.

Mainstream British attitudes even in the 1930s were closer to Hitler than they are to what most Britons believe now. See The Left Redefined ‘The Normal’

https://www.quora.com/What-would-Darwin-think-about-Hitler

The sources of your links are basically the expected angry, fundamentalist ministries. It's an old ploy of angry christians to associate eugenics with "Darwinism". Its all very typical from the ID'iot creationist industry.

I have to note that your cutting and pasting relies on all of the slogans and falsehoods typical of the ID'iot creationist / fundamentalist Christian websites.

Dr. West, meet Dr. Tinkle, Creationist eugenicist

As many have noted, the Intelligent Design movement’s echo chamber has been recently belaboring the connection between Darwinian evolutionary ideas and eugenics. That’s not surprising: the Discovery Institute-headed machine has been on the ropes for a while, unable to make any significant scientific, legal or political headway against evolution science (a.k.a. “Darwinism” in ID/Creationist parlance), and it has naturally turned to what it does best, that is media-based attack campaigns on straw-man stand-ins for evolutionary biology.
 
Darwin had nothing to do with it

Hatred and persecution of Jews dates back to early Christianity

I doubt your last sentence.

Darwin had everything to do with giving Hitler justification. He and his cousin became Hitler's heroes.
I'm afraid you're simply reiterating a lot of slurs that are a staple of the really angry, fundamentalist Christian ministries.

It's really shameful that angry, fundamentalist Christians still promote such falsehoods.

I'm not angry. These are some hard truths that Darwinin's racism influenced socialDarwinism, Herbert Spencer, his cousin Francis Galton and eugenics, Aryan supremacy, and Hitler.

Hitler wrote about evolution in Mein Kampf -- Did Hitler Use the Term "Evolution" in Mein Kampf? | Evolution News.

The Darwin connections to Hitler are serious -- - Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust -

Even the evolution apologists admit racist Darwin influenced Hitler via Ernst Haeckel, another serious racist. Haeckel's the one who read Darwin's book and made up his embryo drawings which fooled an entire generation.

http://home.uchicago.edu/~rjr6/articles/Was Hitler a Darwinian.pdf

From Quora (which leans left):

Instead of the typical biased research and answers:

What would Darwin think about Hitler?

Gwydion Madawc Williams, Read a lot about them
"Unknown. He believed in racial inequality, and was comfortable about the notion of inferior peoples being replaced:

“Competition was not between individuals, but the groups themselves. The hardiest races with the greatest ingenuity and cooperation would prevail, while the struggle ‘leads to the inevitable extinction of all those low and mentally undeveloped with which the European come into contract’. This Darwin could agree with; he marked the passage heavily. Imperial expansion from the north was wiping out the indigenous tribes. The Beagle voyage had shown him as much. He scribbled at the top of the page: ‘natural selection is now acting on the inferior races when put into competition with the New Zealanders – high New Zealanders (sic)
say the [Maori] race dying out like their own native rat’.” (Desmond, Adrian & Moore, James. Darwin. Michael Joseph (Penguin Group) 1991. Page 521. Emphasis added.)

He didn’t approve of slavery: that was seen as cruelty to inferior humans, and I think he also disapproved of cruelty to animals.

A lot of the British ruling class approved of Hitler until he broke the Munich Agreement by taking the Czech half of Czechoslovakia. The degree of approval gets covered up. Unless you are on the Hard Left, you will probably not know that the Daily Mail was pro-Hitler for many years.

Mainstream British attitudes even in the 1930s were closer to Hitler than they are to what most Britons believe now. See The Left Redefined ‘The Normal’

https://www.quora.com/What-would-Darwin-think-about-Hitler


"Mainstream British attitudes even in the 1930s were closer to Hitler than they are to what most Britons believe now. See The Left Redefined ‘The Normal’"

Hitler was a Catholic, BTW, never excomminicated from the church.
 
God did not have his best day when he made the Ten Commandments

Why is that?

I could have done better and I am not even a deity

Dang. Another 1st commandment violation and blatant ignorance of US history.

"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian." - United States Supreme Court, 1892.

"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." --John Adams wrote this on June 28, 1813, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson.

Why don't you be like Benjamin Franklin? He's on the $100 bill.

"Even Benjamin Franklin, the lone member of the group of founders that claimed to be anything but religious, attended every kind of Christian worship, called for public prayer, and contributed to all denominations. In fact, when the Constitutional Convention was finding itself stalling, and the members of the convention were arguing to the point that it was nearly coming to blows, Ben Franklin was the one that proposed that the delegation pray before each session of the Constitutional Convention.

In his request, Franklin stated, "I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?"

U.S. Constitution and Biblical Principles — Kirk Cameron

hundred-dollar-bills-640x480.jpg
 
Ten Commandments have little to do with our laws

Our laws do a better job at protecting human rights than the Ten Commandments

Atheists are usually wrong.

"Over the last two decades, monuments to the Ten Commandments have been removed, often via court orders – and often under protest – from state capitols, parks, and even public schools in Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Alabama, Ohio, Mississippi, New Mexico, Maryland, and Kentucky."

The Ten Commandments and Natural Law - The Catholic Thing
God did not have his best day when he made the Ten Commandments
I could have done better and I am not even a deity
Lol theyre actually pretty terribly thought out
 
God did not have his best day when he made the Ten Commandments

Why is that?

I could have done better and I am not even a deity

Dang. Another 1st commandment violation and blatant ignorance of US history.

"Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian." - United States Supreme Court, 1892.

"The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God." --John Adams wrote this on June 28, 1813, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson.

Why don't you be like Benjamin Franklin? He's on the $100 bill.

"Even Benjamin Franklin, the lone member of the group of founders that claimed to be anything but religious, attended every kind of Christian worship, called for public prayer, and contributed to all denominations. In fact, when the Constitutional Convention was finding itself stalling, and the members of the convention were arguing to the point that it was nearly coming to blows, Ben Franklin was the one that proposed that the delegation pray before each session of the Constitutional Convention.

In his request, Franklin stated, "I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?"

U.S. Constitution and Biblical Principles — Kirk Cameron

View attachment 282044
My commandments that are better than the ones God screwed up
What I would include in my Ten Commandments

1. Thou shall not allow slavery. Moses led the Hebrews out of slavery and struggled to free them. Yet God does not even prohibit slavery in his ten commandments. I would prohibit slavery and order employers to pay an honest wage and order workers to give an honest days work

2. Thou shall be clean in thy person and thy environment. God could have saved hundreds of millions of lives with this one. Sanitation was a major killer of mankind. Keep yourself clean to avoid germs. Do not pollute your drinking water or your environment. Could have prevented the plague and other killer diseases

3. Thou shall not engage in War. War is a practice of man and not God. God should encourage peaceful resolution of conflicts and consider war an act against God

4. Thou shall educate yourself and others. A critical trait of man. Learning and the spread of knowledge. You should strive to learn your whole life and spread knowledge to others

5. I would expand the honor your father and mother to honor your family. Parents should honor their kids, make sure they are fed and clothed and protected. You should work hard to take care of your family
 
Do you think we cannot observe negative effects of doing nothing? That was a horrid example man, challenge yourself.

As far as your "observations" being better than mine, that was a useless snide. We can measure whether action A is more or less harmful to Humans ~ and its not arbitrary so youre still stuck with fucking up your conception of objective vs. subjective. It works like this, both logically as well as scientifically...

Goal: Least suffering.
Suffering: physical/emotional pain.
Pain: Nerves sending harmful stimuli to the brain.

Action: Placing hand on stove, rest of life being controlled for/equal.

Result: Touching stove is not conducive toward goal.

Morality requires no magical thinking, it requires a goal and we can objectively measure our actions against it.

Why is less suffering the goal? Kantian ethics states that no act can be moral unless it was unpleasant.

Kant was wrong.

A thriving Germany that has had their ass kicked twice and still recovered might beg to differ.

I doubt it. But I could be wrong. When you hugged your child (assuming you have one) was it unpleasant or immoral? If neither, then Kant was wrong.

It was neutral and natural. Doing what you like is going to happen anyways. You like it. Doing what you enjoy for the greater good is a neutral act done for your own pleasure and your own benefit. Doing what you hate for the greater good is a moral act. There are ethical codes that require altruism.

Nonsense. Loving your child is not neutral. The idea that you have to hate something for it to be moral is absurd.
 
Evolution is a FACT....it occurs
God is a THEORY

God is fact, but we have the Bible theory. Evolution is theory, too, but only has circumstantial evidence. It isn't backed up by the scientific method while the Bible theory is.
 
I would expand the honor your father and mother to honor your family. Parents should honor their kids, make sure they are fed and clothed and protected. You should work hard to take care of your family

Do you have any kids? If you have kids, then do they call you by your first name or rightwinger instead of "Dad?" Such as "rightwinger, gimme some money?"

ETA: The difference is you can punish your kids (assuming you have some) for dishonoring you and your family. God can punish those who do not obey his 10 commandments after they die. You consider yourself a deity, but can't do squat. Your facts are feces.
 
Last edited:
I am an atheist and I do not fear death. I'd rather put it off for as long as I am healthy and happy. But I know that it is inevitable.

What comes after death? I don't know. Mostly I believe nothing comes after. But if there is something after, I am not afraid. I have lived a good life. I have helped others, loved, been loved, raised great kids into remarkable adults, rescued and saved numerous animals, and I think the world is better for my having been here. If I am wrong, and there is a God(dess), I cannot imagine my after life being punishment because if their ego.
 
Evolution is a FACT....it occurs
God is a THEORY

God is fact, but we have the Bible theory. Evolution is theory, too, but only has circumstantial evidence. It isn't backed up by the scientific method while the Bible theory is.
None of the gods are "fact". The invention of something you call "bible theory" seems to be a term you can't even define.
 
I am an atheist and I do not fear death. I'd rather put it off for as long as I am healthy and happy. But I know that it is inevitable.

What comes after death? I don't know. Mostly I believe nothing comes after. But if there is something after, I am not afraid. I have lived a good life. I have helped others, loved, been loved, raised great kids into remarkable adults, rescued and saved numerous animals, and I think the world is better for my having been here. If I am wrong, and there is a God(dess), I cannot imagine my after life being punishment because if their ego.
That's one of those things. You said that perfectly.

If you live what you felt was a positive existence...and then because you didnt worship x,y,z deity who never proved to you they existed...

and they PUNISH you for it? They were not worthy of worship to begin with. Id rather be as far away from an immoral monster like that as possible.

Makes the god sound like what the satan would sound like if we reframed some of the background setting.
 
I would expand the honor your father and mother to honor your family. Parents should honor their kids, make sure they are fed and clothed and protected. You should work hard to take care of your family

Do you have any kids? If you have kids, then do they call you by your first name or rightwinger instead of "Dad?" Such as "rightwinger, gimme some money?"

ETA: The difference is you can punish your kids (assuming you have some) for dishonoring you and your family. God can punish those who do not obey his 10 commandments after they die. You consider yourself a deity, but can't do squat. Your facts are feces.
I suppose you believe drowning your children, putting them to the sword, destroying them in horrible ways is acceptable when they are a disappointment to you.
 
Do you think, aside from the "worship me" sort of stuff...that any Moral ways within your system are not apparent by a mere day to day observation of cause and effect? Which ones, if so...just kicking some ideas around...
I think they are quite apparent. We would lose sight of them were they not.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: GT
I am an atheist and I do not fear death. I'd rather put it off for as long as I am healthy and happy. But I know that it is inevitable.

What comes after death? I don't know. Mostly I believe nothing comes after. But if there is something after, I am not afraid. I have lived a good life. I have helped others, loved, been loved, raised great kids into remarkable adults, rescued and saved numerous animals, and I think the world is better for my having been here. If I am wrong, and there is a God(dess), I cannot imagine my after life being punishment because if their ego.

After death, comes final judgement and every eye will see. I just learned a couple months ago that the challenge that one atheist said to God was answered already. I thought that his statement that every atheist past, present, and future would have to see proof of God was one of the most powerful and insightful things an atheist ever said. It made front page news in the SF Examiner paper. This was after Professor Lawrence Krauss was asked the question what would it take for you to believe in God during his debate with William Lane Craig on "Is there evidence for God?" He said if the stars rearranged itself to spell, "I am here."

"Now, it would be easy to have evidence for God. If the stars rearrange themselves tonight and I looked up tonight—well not here, but in a place where you could see the stars, in Arizona, say,—and I looked up tonight and I saw the stars rearrange themselves say, “I am here.” Gee, that’s pretty interesting evidence! And, in fact, when we talk about evidence, the only evidence you can have for God is really miraculous evidence because the existence of God implies something that is supernatural, something beyond that which can be explained by physical theory."

This atheist thought that people on the other side of the hemisphere would not see and so it would not be proof. He was right. They he went on to state his now famous challenge to God.

Is There Evidence for God? The Craig-Krauss Debate | Reasonable Faith

“‘Look, he is coming with the clouds,’ and ‘every eye will see him, even those who pierced him’; and all peoples on earth ‘will mourn because of him.’ So shall it be! Amen.” Revelation 1:7

It was already prophecised that every person past, present, and future would have proof of Jesus.

It's fine that you do not fear death, but when the time comes who knows? We aren't the judge. Jesus is the judge and what has been discussed has been laid out such as the Ten Commandments and the Bible.

Thanks for your opinion.
 

Forum List

Back
Top