My views on objective morality

[bennyboy]

Obviously. Why, then, is it okay for God to allow the murderer-rapist to carry out his action?

Because God will (eventually and after perhaps a life of suffering) remove this once-child's pain and suffering and find a place for her in heaven?


Oh wait. . . no he won't, because she may have a hard life: substance abuse, attraction to an abusive spouse, possible suicide. . . and those things are likely to put her on a path to sinning, and a subsequent trip to the Big Fiery Basement. Her reward for being the target of God's free-will experiment on the pedophile will likely be an eternity in hell.

[robvalue]

---

CL, let me talk about the morality of free will.  A rapist has the free will to rape a child.  You console yourself, perhaps, with the knowledge that he will eventually be held account by God for his actions.  But what of the child?  The child, you may say, will be rewarded with an eternity in heaven-- though he/she hasn't done anything particularly worth of reward.

It seems to me that God's version of free will shows a willingness on his part to let innocents suffer in order to give sinners enough rope to hang themselves.  And they do so by their own nature, which was anyway established by God.  It seems to me that if such a God is real, only a bad person would do anything but openly rebel against him.

You shouldn't be preaching the gospel.  You should be burning it.  Because YOU seem to me like a good person.

I've never heard an answer to this. Time and again, "free will" is brought up as a get-out-of-jail-free card for God's negligence. Examples like this are brought up to show the gaping holes in the idea, and then it just drifts off into the sunset after getting no reply, waiting for the process to repeat.

Any christian like to have a stab at this? (Anyone who is interested in defending God to some higher standard than "everything he does is great".)

Having the free will to choose to "follow" God, or not, is one thing. Why do you additionally need the option of raping children? Isn't just ignoring God enough for him? I mean, I ignore God, but I don't need to rape kids or bang nails into kittens in order to make the choice clear. So what is the point of allowing such actions to be possible? If he's so set on objective morality, he could make these things into an actual law, so that we literally can't do them (and wouldn't even think about wanting to do them). Why include this "feature"?

Cue "mysterious ways", which basically means I should ignore anything else the person has said on the subject up to this point, as they admit they have no understanding of God.

---

Why am I not surprised this has received no rebuttal from anyone.

[LadyForCamus]

Camus: Thank you I'm very much not a kid person. My wife wasn't either, but she is now kind of fantasising about the idea. I don't think she really wants one, but is just cherry picking the nice parts and displacing the rest.

I have far too many reasons not to have my own children, so it would be through adoption if we did do it. (I've had the operation, I decided many years ago I didn't want my own children.) Adoption's not out of the question for the future, although right now I'm nowhere near healthy enough to be a dad. My wife is partially my carer as it is. I am improving, though.

My instincts are far more for animals, and our lives revolve around our four "hairy kids"! At the moment it's a dog, two rabbits and a hamster. Our shared love of animals is one of our closest bonds.

It seems to me the people who worry the most about being terrible parents are the ones who are actually great, because they can comprehend the weight of that responsibility to it's fullest extent. It's the idiots who are out there manufacturing offspring like they're sea monkeys who should be stopped from reproducing.

Adoption is so nice because it gives children a second chance. I'm sure you and your wife would make great parents someday if you ever decide to go down that road. If not, furry kids are just as much of a pain in the ass as regular ones, so you wouldn't be missing out in that regard! (My husband and I have four cats. FOUR. FOUR FUCKING CATS. Ask me why, and I couldn't give you a single answer that makes any sense to me now.) [emoji13]

[Joods]

Cats.
Speaking of cats, mine are currently getting into stuff they shouldn't and pissing my life off.

[robvalue]

Camus: Thanks very much I tend to agree with your general assessment as well.

That's right, there's so many children already in this world that need a home that I'd rather help one of them than create another one. Same reason I always get my animals from rescue centres.

Four cats? Wow, I bet they have you wrapped round their little claws I love cats too (I love all animals), I grew up with them. Our doggy wouldn't tolerate one now though! She can barely tolerate them existing at all.

[Catholic_Lady]

CL, let me talk about the morality of free will.  A rapist has the free will to rape a child.  You console yourself, perhaps, with the knowledge that he will eventually be held account by God for his actions.  But what of the child?  The child, you may say, will be rewarded with an eternity in heaven-- though he/she hasn't done anything particularly worth of reward.

It seems to me that God's version of free will shows a willingness on his part to let innocents suffer in order to give sinners enough rope to hang themselves.  And they do so by their own nature, which was anyway established by God.  It seems to me that if such a God is real, only a bad person would do anything but openly rebel against him.

You shouldn't be preaching the gospel.  You should be burning it.  Because YOU seem to me like a good person.

I've never heard an answer to this. Time and again, "free will" is brought up as a get-out-of-jail-free card for God's negligence. Examples like this are brought up to show the gaping holes in the idea, and then it just drifts off into the sunset after getting no reply, waiting for the process to repeat.

Any christian like to have a stab at this? (Anyone who is interested in defending God to some higher standard than "everything he does is great".)

Having the free will to choose to "follow" God, or not, is one thing. Why do you additionally need the option of raping children? Isn't just ignoring God enough for him? I mean, I ignore God, but I don't need to rape kids or bang nails into kittens in order to make the choice clear. So what is the point of allowing such actions to be possible? If he's so set on objective morality, he could make these things into an actual law, so that we literally can't do them (and wouldn't even think about wanting to do them). Why include this "feature"?

Cue "mysterious ways", which basically means I should ignore anything else the person has said on the subject up to this point, as they admit they have no understanding of God.

Are you asking why God gave us the free will to rape? Having full control over your own body means you have the freedom to use your body to do horrible things, rape included. If we were to magically become paralyzed every time we wanted to do something bad, then we wouldn't really have free will or bodily autonomy.

[abaris]

Are you asking why God gave us the free will to rape? Having full control over your own body means you have the freedom to use your body to do horrible things, rape included. If we were to magically become paralyzed every time we wanted to do something bad, then we wouldn't really have free will or bodily autonomy.

Which should have been obvious to an omniscient and omnipotent being right from the get go. Even if I found any reason to believe in god given free will in the first place, god would know about any rape, any murder, millions of years before it has been comitted. The tales never did add up for me and I never even dived into these issues being illogical. For me it was entirely sufficient that (catholic) god doesn't compute with earth's history.

[Ryantology]

I've never heard an answer to this. Time and again, "free will" is brought up as a get-out-of-jail-free card for God's negligence. Examples like this are brought up to show the gaping holes in the idea, and then it just drifts off into the sunset after getting no reply, waiting for the process to repeat.

Any christian like to have a stab at this? (Anyone who is interested in defending God to some higher standard than "everything he does is great".)

Having the free will to choose to "follow" God, or not, is one thing. Why do you additionally need the option of raping children? Isn't just ignoring God enough for him? I mean, I ignore God, but I don't need to rape kids or bang nails into kittens in order to make the choice clear. So what is the point of allowing such actions to be possible? If he's so set on objective morality, he could make these things into an actual law, so that we literally can't do them (and wouldn't even think about wanting to do them). Why include this "feature"?

Cue "mysterious ways", which basically means I should ignore anything else the person has said on the subject up to this point, as they admit they have no understanding of God.

Are you asking why God gave us the free will to rape? Having full control over your own body means you have the freedom to use your body to do horrible things, rape included. If we were to magically become paralyzed every time we wanted to do something bad, then we wouldn't really have free will or bodily autonomy.

God didn't give us the free will to flap our arms and fly, presumably because he wanted to prevent us from doing so. We thus do not really have free will or bodily autonomy.

[Catholic_Lady]

Are you asking why God gave us the free will to rape? Having full control over your own body means you have the freedom to use your body to do horrible things, rape included. If we were to magically become paralyzed every time we wanted to do something bad, then we wouldn't really have free will or bodily autonomy.

Which should have been obvious to an omniscient and omnipotent being right from the get go. Even if I found any reason to believe in god given free will in the first place, god would know about any rape, any murder, millions of years before it has been comitted. The tales never did add up for me and I never even dived into these issues being illogical. For me it was entirely sufficient that (catholic) god doesn't compute with earth's history.

That is true that we believe God is all knowing. Which is why part of our faith includes the belief that in the end, everything will be made right, despite whatever temporary pain we have to go through.

 In the meantime though, part of being human means we have the ability to choose good from evil, and we have the ability to act on either of those. Even though many of us will choose to do horrible things at times, God looked at humanity and still called it good. The good out weighs the bad, and in the end, everything will be made right. We don't know how or when because mere humans can't fully understand God, and can't see the whole universe - past, present, and future, but our beliefs are that God is goodness and love.

[abaris]

 In the meantime though, part of being human means we have the ability to choose good from evil, and we have the ability to act on either of those. Even though many of us will choose to do horrible things at times, God looked at humanity and still called it good. The good out weighs the bad, and in the end, everything will be made right. We don't know how or when because mere humans can't fully understand God, and can't see the whole universe - past, present, and future, but our beliefs are that God is goodness and love.

Which is why I always keep urging to dive into recent primate and dog research. It should be humbling to everyone considering humanity the superior species and it's humbling to me, who doesn't hold that believe.

But, alas, noone ever seems to do that.