Atheists; what do you base your morals on?

[Angrboda]

Just a quick note here. The argumentum ad populum or appeal to consensus is not a fallacy if the validity of the proposition is in fact necessarily dependent on or indicated by the will or opinion of the people (such as is argued here, by atheists). It is only when the will of the people itself does not logically necessitate the validity of the proposition that it is a fallacy.

(example, "The majority of practicing cosmologists subscribe to the big bang theory. Therefore, the big bang theory is the scientific explanation of the nature of the universe's origins." Practicing cosmologists are the relevant scientific community, and the consensus of the scientific community determines what is the accepted scientific theory, therefore, while the appeal is to consensus, it is not fallacious. Whether morals are properly a legitimate subject to be decided by consensus or not is exactly what is at issue, so the cry of "argumentum ad populum fallacy" lacks proper foundation to be made in this matter.)

[Cyberman]

What is wrong with asking a question? I asked for justification as to why he thinks it's immoral and what evidence or logic he's using, and all I get is a foul-mouthed rant. Is that what the Atheists of this forum are reduced to? Argument from ridicule?

If you think your questions are open to ridicule, maybe you should stop asking ridiculous questions. However, I'll make a deal with you. You resist the urge to generalise all atheists based on one individual and I won't judge the whole of your religion on similar grounds. Ok? (It'll be easy for me, since I try not to be a judgemental arsehole anyway. How about you?)

Not surprising that some people on here can't reason, we're looking at a very old age group in Min. Intellect isn't sharp at such an age.

And therefore his opinion is worthless? You've never heard of Argumentum ad Hominem, have you?

[Baalzebutt]

You make a good point but we are also talking about very different types of behaviors. I don't think anyone here would disagree that murder is a far more heinous and far-reaching crime than adultery.

So, while it is appropriate for the justice system to take action on a murder which is primarily a social crime, it is a very different thing for the justice system to take on adultery, which is, by-and-large, a personal misjudgement.

Indeed... and that is why it doesn't.
But, of course, the injured party cannot retaliate with something that would force the justice system to intervene.

Such as stoning someone to death, for instance...

[ideologue08]

What is wrong with asking a question? I asked for justification as to why he thinks it's immoral and what evidence or logic he's using, and all I get is a foul-mouthed rant. Is that what the Atheists of this forum are reduced to? Argument from ridicule?

If you think your questions are open to ridicule, maybe you should stop asking ridiculous questions. However, I'll make a deal with you. You resist the urge to generalise all atheists based on one individual and I won't judge the whole of your religion on similar grounds. Ok? (It'll be easy for me, since I try not to be a judgemental arsehole anyway. How about you?)

Not surprising that some people on here can't reason, we're looking at a very old age group in Min. Intellect isn't sharp at such an age.

And therefore his opinion is worthless? You've never heard of Argumentum ad Hominem, have you?

No, the fact that Atheists on here such as yourself are using argument from ridicule shows the standard of debate here; very very low. No understanding of logical argumentation, just fallacy after fallacy.

I can judge Min's posts and apply it to the forum in general because Min. has apparently been voted "member of the year". That speaks volumes, when an ignoramus like that is held in high regard. Disgusting.

Did I say his opinion is worthless because of his age? No! Stop using a strawman. God, the level of debate is shit here.

[Cyberman]

You're making personal attacks on Min in place of addressing his arguments. Besides being a classic fallacy and a typical dishonest debating tactic, it's also a means of avoiding the issue. Either quit it and actually respond to what's been raised or acknowledge that you can't. I think an apology to Min wouldn't go amiss, as well. And since you've now turned your sights in my direction, please show me where I have used such arguments from ridicule against you.

[Baalzebutt]

No, the fact that Atheists on here such as yourself are using argument from ridicule shows the standard of debate here; very very low. No understanding of logical argumentation, just fallacy after fallacy.

I can judge Min's posts and apply it to the forum in general because Min. has apparently been voted "member of the year". That speaks volumes, when an ignoramus like that is held in high regard. Disgusting.

Did I say his opinion is worthless because of his age? No! Stop using a strawman. God, the level of debate is shit here.

You goal here is nothing like debate. You goal is to piss people off, plain and simple. I sincerely doubt that you subscribe to ANYTHING you are arguing and are, instead, putting forth these absolutely ridiculous ideas simple to stir the pot.

You are a poe and a troll who gets his jollies by getting under the skin of others because you can't stand to be in your own skin.

[Whateverist]

I asked for justification as to why he thinks it's immoral and what evidence or logic he's using ... Not surprising that some people on here can't reason, we're looking at a very old age group in Min. Intellect isn't sharp at such an age.

Going for humorous effect here or were you just demonstrating the level of evidence and logic you expect from people making assertions?

[CleanShavenJesus]

Hold on, mo66, you do realize that you were the one to start the "personal attacks", right? How can you criticize Min's response when you responded like this:

Calm down dear. You're quite old, nearing the end of your life. Do you really want to bow out having such a malicious vile attitude?

Either you're a moron or you're trying to anger some dude you've never even met. Which is kind of strange.

[Mister Agenda]

No, the fact that Atheists on here such as yourself are using argument from ridicule shows the standard of debate here; very very low. No understanding of logical argumentation, just fallacy after fallacy.

When you started off, I kinda liked you, because you seemed like a good sport. Now I see you generalizing about atheists based on the few that are being insulting to you. Is this something you commonly do when insulted by a member of a minority, start going on about 'members of this minority like yourself' are doing such-and-such? I belong to two Muslim forums and have been insulted plenty, but it never occurred to me to hold the rest of the Muslims there responsible for the actions of the few bulldogs that seem to inhabit every forum that values free speech.

I can judge Min's posts and apply it to the forum in general because Min. has apparently been voted "member of the year". That speaks volumes, when an ignoramus like that is held in high regard. Disgusting.

Min is just one of those people who thinks of a woman being stoned to death and gets emotional about it. Perhaps that's not typical of Min's responses in general.

Did I say his opinion is worthless because of his age? No! Stop using a strawman. God, the level of debate is shit here.

You're not doing anything to raise it. Seems like you're happy to wallow in the mud the instant you get your panties in a twist. If you can't respond any better than that, the level of debate here is perfect for you.

[catfish]

Hold on, mo66, you do realize that you were the one to start the "personal attacks", right? How can you criticize Min's response when you responded like this:

Calm down dear. You're quite old, nearing the end of your life. Do you really want to bow out having such a malicious vile attitude?

Either you're a moron or you're trying to anger some dude you've never even met. Which is kind of strange.

This means you're blind, asshole... (maybe...)
.