It also has a lot to do with the fact that the vast majority of people did not ever leave the 30 miles or so from where they were born. Tribalism was a real thing, and I think the vestiges of that tribalism are what we see today.

(May 15, 2015 at 2:21 pm)Freedom4me Wrote: The universe is orderly and purposeful in certain ways.  How could impersonal stuff like matter and energy "obey" laws of any kind?  Where do the laws of nature and the laws of logic come from?  If there is no god, why do so many atheists care so much about the non-existence of a supposedly fictional deity?  Please don't take any offense to my words.  I'm not trying to offend anyone here.  I'm just asking a few questions that seem to be fair.

Sure, the universe is orderly, here and there - for a time..anyway......but I can;t find this "purposeful" business anywhere in the scientific literature?  Citation, perhaps?  How did we go about determining that it was purposeful?

Matter and energy doesn't actually "obey" any law - that's just a way for us to conceptualize and communicate the regularity of many relationships and effects we see present around us.  Those natural laws are descriptive, not proscriptive.  There are no laws floating around sorting things alphabetically and laying blocks flush a-la Tetris.  Eh?

The laws of nature and the laws of logic come from human minds, attempting to reconcile what we see with a structure for organizing knowledge.  Not so mysterious, in my estimation...you can find people all over the place. I'm getting the feeling that you think they come from a god - but so long as human beings are capable of thinking them up - which we demonstrably are and have done-...then I see no need to assume the existence of some other party.

I can only speak for myself, as to why an atheist might be concerned with things on the periphery of religion.  For me, it has to do with what said gods -followers- are up to (I, like you, understand that peoples beliefs do not have to be true for those beliefs to have an effect on the believer, those around him, and society as a whole. Let that sink in.).  More fundamentally though, what would this have to say regarding the question asked "If there is no god?".  If no atheist, anywhere, gave a shit...would that also have something to say on -that- matter?

as in:

"If there is no god" - then why are atheists so preoccupied? The implication here is, of course, that there is a god, and this is why atheists are preoccupied.
so
"If there is no god" - and no atheist anywhere gave it a moments thought.....would that imply that there actually was no god?

In short, are you sure that the questions you're asking can yield the answers you desire -either way-?

(May 15, 2015 at 3:42 pm)Stimbo Wrote: First of all, welcome aboard.

Second: there's a difference between physical laws and societal ones. Physical laws are descriptive of nature; societal laws are proscriptive towards behaviour. If nature could write proscriptive laws, wouldn't "keep off the grass" be among the top ten?

It is..that shits full of thorns with tetanus on em.....  

(May 15, 2015 at 7:45 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(May 15, 2015 at 7:25 pm)Freedom4me Wrote: I don't recall having said that slavery is wrong.

Welcome.

Do you believe slavery is wrong?  Do you think the bible says slavery is wrong?

Thanks.  I'm not sure that the bible is anti slavery.  God certainly recognized the existence of slavery as it was a fairly common thing in those days.  But in the NT, Jesus recognized the existence of divorce.  I wouldn't infer from that that Jesus gave His stamp of approval to divorce.  As for my own beliefs, I think that in these days slavery is no longer justified. We have other more civilized means to deal with the issues that in OT days were "solved" by slavery.

---

(May 15, 2015 at 8:38 pm)whateverist Wrote: Is "race-based" slavery wrong because the bible says so, or did the bible just get that one right?

I'll leave it to those who care what the bible says to pick apart whether the bible indeed says that.  I've certainly heard the bit about the slavery mentioned in the bible being of a non-raced based variety, and therefore acceptable.  Of course most people who don't rely on authoritative sources for their moral thinking would strongly question whether any variety of slavery is okay.  But if that is what our new member has in mind, I'd like to know where he thinks the bible calls out race-based slavery, or, where it specifies the characteristics which render some varieties of slavery blessed in the eyes of the god thingy.

Oh and welcome, you've been busy today.

Thanks, whateverist.  I sure have been busy here.  Does God say (in the bible) that He is against race-based slavery?  Not specifically. For me the idea of enslaving a person merely because he/she is a certain race that is (was) viewed as only 3/5 human is wrong because it is not just prideful but factually wrong and horribly reckless.  When abortion is supported for similar reasons I feel that it is wrong too.  How can we be certain that a 2-3 month fetus is something less than fully human?

A fetus is human and alive. I don't think anyone would argue against that fact. However a 2 -3 month old fetus does not have a brain that can have pain or feel fear. It isn't a person yet in the way that you and I are.

Welcome to the forum!

(May 16, 2015 at 3:21 am)robvalue Wrote: We need to build a slavery simulation machine, to see how long people who think slavery is OK could stand it before begging to be unplugged from it.

i could code that fairly simply with if else loops 

here is a basis of it. Ill get around when ever i can to make it. 

if slavery (int okay)
{

}

else slavery(int bad)
{

}

The only reason I really think about a particular deity is that his followers insist on trying to insert him into the public discourse.

Religion is like a penis ... it's cool if you have one, but quit sticking it in my face.

(May 16, 2015 at 4:52 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: The only reason I really think about a particular deity is that his followers insist on trying to insert him into the public discourse.

Religion is like a penis ... it's cool if you have one, but quit sticking it in my face.

To the extent that our laws reflect our moral conscience, it might be unavoidable that theists insert their theistic morality into the public discourse.  The alternative for theists would be to just sit down, shut up, and let the nontheists run things as they see fit.  Would that be a reasonable attitude for theists to take?

---

(May 16, 2015 at 3:40 pm)Nope Wrote: A fetus is human and alive. I don't think anyone would argue against that fact. However a 2 -3 month old fetus does not have a brain that can have pain or feel fear. It isn't a person yet in the way that you and I are.

Welcome to the forum!

Thanks, Nope.  I agree that a 2-3 month fetus isn't a person yet in the way you and I are, but neither is a person who is so severely retarded that he or she can't even learn to speak.  There are many ways that it is possible to be fully human... yet not in the way you and I are.  My attitude on abortion is still evolving, but in general, when in doubt, I would err on the side of protecting human life even when I'm not quite certain when a fetus can legitimately be called a human being. 

(May 16, 2015 at 5:12 pm)Freedom4me Wrote: To the extent that our laws reflect our moral conscience, it might be unavoidable that theists insert their theistic morality into the public discourse.  The alternative for theists would be to just sit down, shut up, and let the nontheists run things as they see fit.  Would that be a reasonable attitude for theists to take?

That's a false dichotomy. One one hand, you can try to make it so everyone has to live by your version of morality. On the other, you can sit down and shut up and let everyone run roughshod over you.

In the middle, there's realizing that this country was founded on personal freedom. You do it your way, and don't try to legislate that everyone else do it your way. Vote for personal liberty. Realize that just because you vote for someone's liberty to do something that you disagree with, this doesn't mean that you tacitly approve of it or that you are required to do it yourself. A fair bit of this country would vote to make homosexuality a crime. That is so antithetical to what America was founded on. If such a hypothetical law criminalizing homosexuality were proposed, how would you vote? If you would vote against it, does that mean that you approve of homosexuality?

(May 16, 2015 at 5:12 pm)Freedom4me Wrote:

(May 16, 2015 at 4:52 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: The only reason I really think about a particular deity is that his followers insist on trying to insert him into the public discourse.

Religion is like a penis ... it's cool if you have one, but quit sticking it in my face.

To the extent that our laws reflect our moral conscience, it might be unavoidable that theists insert their theistic morality into the public discourse.  The alternative for theists would be to just sit down, shut up, and let the nontheists run things as they see fit.  Would that be a reasonable attitude for theists to take?

Animals have morals its not only a human thing. Humans always had morals and lets say if we did get our morals from a god that is blatantly a psychopathth we would all be horrible 
beings. Our morality evolved and changed with us throughout history. Racism is ethically and morally wrong now then it was acceptable same goes with slavery if we did get our morals from a god we would even in the first world would still have slavery, because no one is going to challenge that moral basis of it being wrong. 

Here is a article showing how moral animals are. 
http://www.livescience.com/24800-animals...ality.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...orals.html

Here is a better one
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.v...f-empathy/
http://www.onekind.org/be_inspired/anima...y_in_mice/

Even animals have a sense of morality empathy and even emotion just because they can't openly say it out in our language they show it through their actions.
Given that if you could speak to a animal they wouldn't know what a god or creator is either. 

So no morals do not come from a god we would be spilling blood and killing others if it was.