(March 8, 2016 at 10:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:16 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Well then, like I said earlier, can we not agree to disagree here without grudge holding?  

Not if our disagreement involves you insisting that I'm excusing the complicity of rape, torture, murder, and every single vile thing anyone has ever done. 

Sorry. If I was a perfect person I could get over that too, but I'm not and I can't.

*rubs eyes*. Okay, so you don't see God as complicit in regards to these vile acts. Would it be fair to say he is complacent in regards to them?

(March 8, 2016 at 10:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:12 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: Then why do you excuse the god who is pleased to stand by and watch when it happens? .

I have explained this for the last time in Post #618. Don't know what else you want me to say.

I don't want you to say anything, CL, and I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for pointing out the problems in your arguments (remember, you started this thread to argue that your god is moral). I want you to apply some actual thought to the doctrine-based ideas through which you evaluate this world and the people in it without any special pleading. If God is what you believe he is, then he should be enough of a big boy that he would not take offense at being held to the same standards of evaluation which you would hold me, or any human to. If anything, the standards for a god should be more stringent, not less!

(March 8, 2016 at 10:28 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: This thread's getting intense.

Lol, thanks, I needed that!

(March 8, 2016 at 10:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have explained this for the last time in Post #618. Don't know what else you want me to say.

I don't want you to say anything, CL, and I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for pointing out the problems in your arguments (remember, you started this thread to argue that your god is moral). I want you to apply some actual thought to the doctrine-based ideas through which you evaluate this world and the people in it without any special pleading. If God is what you believe he is, then he should be enough of a big boy that he would not take offense at being held to the same standards of evaluation which you would hold me, or any human to. If anything, the standards for a god should be more stringent, not less!

Yes, please, let's all remember the subject of this thread before people start getting their feelings hurt. I have no desire to burn bridges with anyone here especially so soon after becoming a member, and while I'm nowhere near perfect, I'm also not going to just concede to a fallacious argument because I don't want that person to be mad at me.

(March 8, 2016 at 10:13 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:11 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: What I am saying is that it's not logical.

Well obviously it is to me.

No.

You might BELIEVE it.  But you don't get to say it's "logical to me." Either it is logical or it isn't. And it isn't. And to be blunt, if you can't see the logical inconsistencies in your religion, you are (at least in this area of your life) not thinking logically.

The idea of an all-knowing, all-loving God who allows child rape isn't logical, because as YOU YOURSELF have repeatedly stated, child rape is objectively evil. If there is good in it, like the child's rape will somehow allow God to keep the Earth from falling into the sun or something, then it is in fact NOT objectively evil. If rape is, in fact, objectively evil, and God allows rape, then God is failing to remove evil from the universe, and is doing so deliberately. Such a God cannot be called good. Therefore, one of the following must be true: 1) morality is not objective; 2) God is not good.

I'd mention, by the way, that your religious ideas aren't consistent with either the Catholic faith, or the Bible, or with any mainstream religious tradition. I get the sense that you haven't studied the Bible or any academic arguments, and that instead you focus on a couple religious ideas that make you feel warm and fuzzy-- while ignoring 99% of the doctrines of your religion. Again, we are back to you being a generally good person, and IDENTIFYING with an institution which you cannot actually fully support (since you haven't worked to fully understand it). Am I wrong about this?

(March 8, 2016 at 10:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:19 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I have explained this for the last time in Post #618. Don't know what else you want me to say.

I don't want you to say anything, CL, and I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for pointing out the problems in your arguments (remember, you started this thread to argue that your god is moral). I want you to apply some actual thought to the doctrine-based ideas through which you evaluate this world and the people in it without any special pleading. If God is what you believe he is, then he should be enough of a big boy that he would not take offense at being held to the same standards of evaluation which you would hold me, or any human to. If anything, the standards for a god should be more stringent, not less!

Generally speaking, I have no problem with you disagreeing with my views. But if you continue to accuse me of defending rape in any way, then I'm sorry, but it's not something I can reconcile with. That's really all there is to it.

(March 9, 2016 at 12:12 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: I don't want you to say anything, CL, and I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for pointing out the problems in your arguments (remember, you started this thread to argue that your god is moral). I want you to apply some actual thought to the doctrine-based ideas through which you evaluate this world and the people in it without any special pleading. If God is what you believe he is, then he should be enough of a big boy that he would not take offense at being held to the same standards of evaluation which you would hold me, or any human to. If anything, the standards for a god should be more stringent, not less!

Generally speaking, I have no problem with you disagreeing with my views. But if you continue to accuse me of defending rape in any way, then I'm sorry, but it's not something I can reconcile with. That's really all there is to it.

Nobody's accusing you of defending rape.  We are saying that you are EXCUSING God's implied complicity in rape by special pleading.

So when God allows a child to be raped, and does not stop it, are you prepared to say that God is doing something wrong?  Or do you trust that there's a good intent and a good value in the rape of that child?  You've said both-- that rape is objectively evil, and that God does indeed allow rape.  You EXCUSE this by saying God is special and his goodness is beyong our comprehension.

Read this carefully and tell me-- have I said anything false?

(March 8, 2016 at 9:51 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 9:25 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: CL, I know you're a good person, but do you worship the god which allows rape to happen and go unpunished, or don't you?

You keep on making that excuse that God shouldn't be expected to "micromanage the world", but he does in fact have all that power, and in fact the doctrine you follow is that he is everywhere in it, and able to change anything with just a word. Now if I were in that alley where somebody was raped, and I did absolutely nothing, then I could be held as an accessory to that crime! Therefore, CL, I must ask you, and I think you really need to answer this: why in sacred fuck do you think your god, with all his power, should be held to a lesser degree of responsibility than an ordinary human? Because this is, no buts, exactly what you are doing.

I'm gonna say this one more time, and this goes to everyone.  

I believe God allows nature to take its course. I believe He allows people to have free will. He let's things happen as they would, naturally. 

He does not resort to divine intervention to micromanage the world.  

From that, there are good and bad consequences. One of the bad consequences is rape. However, I trust God to know that the good consequences of His decision to give us free will and to not be a micromanager, outweigh the bad consequences of it. Im not saying the bad consequences aren't bad. I'm not saying rape, specifically, has good consequences. I'm saying I trust that the good consequences in general, of giving us free will, in general... of not resorting to divine intervention, of letting nature take its course, etc, etc, outweigh the bad.  

What are the "good consequences?" That I do not know. I'm just a little human, living in a tiny section of the universe, for a tiny amount of time. I'm not God. I can't see everything.   

Also, I believe that if God did become human like us He would stop a rape if it came to it. After all, He did stop the stoning of an adulteress. But He is not human right now. And stopping bad things from happening would require divine intervention, taking away free will, micromanaging. Which are all things that He, for whatever reason that we can't see right now, has deemed would do more harm than good in the grand scheme of things. (Also, I never said rape goes unpunished so I'm not sure where that straw came from.)    

So, that's it. That's all there is to it. You may not like it, but at this point I honestly don't give a fuck. It's your decision whether you choose to accept my differences and still be cool with me, as I accept yours, or not. But there is nothing else I can say on the subject that hasn't already been said. So take it or leave it.

I'm sorry, but what "free will" are you talking about? I didn't choose to be born, or suffer this life. Also I'd like to add that as far as I've seen in response to your posts on this subject matter--you've gotten quite an understanding response. I'm still reviewing this thread, so, don't quote me on it--but, I don't believe you should take in any way personally, how others have reacted to your claims. I've seen far worse, as a matter of fact, and have yet to see anyone flame you [personally] but rather your beliefs-- which is typically what happens when you say "my god condones and even spells out instructions on rape but he has reasons therefore I'm ok with it". And you did make claims, and as far as I've seen, you've gotten par le course responses on said claims. You aren't the first, believe it or not, to "be a nice person" (I'll take that claim others have made since they're the ones arguing against your standpoint) and still be on the wrong side of things. See we aren't the ones making claims that there is a god or that he is complacent in what happens on this planet, or that the bible is the living word of god. You are. If people are getting heated on the subject, it's because it's a very personal subject and claim! You may or may not be speaking to victims of abuse, under the guise of god, and literally waving off their torment as "lesser than the bigger picture".

(March 8, 2016 at 10:49 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:36 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: I don't want you to say anything, CL, and I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for pointing out the problems in your arguments (remember, you started this thread to argue that your god is moral). I want you to apply some actual thought to the doctrine-based ideas through which you evaluate this world and the people in it without any special pleading. If God is what you believe he is, then he should be enough of a big boy that he would not take offense at being held to the same standards of evaluation which you would hold me, or any human to. If anything, the standards for a god should be more stringent, not less!

Yes, please, let's all remember the subject of this thread before people start getting their feelings hurt.  I have no desire to burn bridges with anyone here especially so soon after becoming a member, and while I'm nowhere near perfect, I'm also not going to just concede to a fallacious argument because I don't want that person to be mad at me.  

I'm not going to apologize for "getting my feelings hurt" over continuously being accused of defending rape, torture, murder, etc, by people who I previously considered friends on here. 

There's no reason why a person shouldn't be able to say "Ok, you know what CL, I obviously don't agree with your views. And they make 0 sense to me. But if you're telling me that you don't defend rape, torture, murder, etc etc, then I will take your word for it and not continue to accuse you of it, even if I don't understand or agree with how you worked it out in your mind." Other atheists on here have done that (thank you whatevereist, Ryantology, and Mister Agenda), so it's not impossible to do. 

Personally, I don't understand how any of you can say raping children, for example, is morally subjective and just a matter of opinion. It makes no sense to me for someone to say rape is not objectively immoral, and then to say they are 100% against rape in all circumstances. But when almost all of you told me exactly that in the beginning of this thread, I took your word for it. I didn't/don't understand or agree with how you worked that out in our heads, but if in your hearts you are 100% against rape despite thinking it is only subjectively immoral, then that's all that matters to me. And I respect you enough to take your word for it, and I would never accuse you of something as vile as defending it.   

The fact that you can't do the same in return on this particular issue, is not something I can reconcile with. Many things I can, and do, but not this. Perhaps you don't understand how offensive and patronizing it is to be accused of defending something as awful as rape, simply because the person throwing the accusation doesn't agree with or understand how you came to that conclusion.

(March 9, 2016 at 12:33 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Personally, I don't understand how any of you can say raping children, for example, is morally subjective and just a matter of opinion.

Because God is good, and God allows it. If it is objectively evil, then a God which allows it is evil. Therefore, it is NECESSARILY TRUE that either: 1) God is not good; or 2) rape is not objectively evil.

/thread