The Moral Argument for God

[athrock]

What does "objectively moral" mean?

The definition has been posted in this thread many times. Here it is again:

Objective moral values are those whose truth is independent of individual, personal opinions or societal conventions.

Can anyone tell me? I keep hearing the term, but I can't think of what that might actually be, beyond a meaningless phrase to imply the existence of something that likely does not and cannot exist.

You can google the phrase and find dozens of articles that might help you.

And yes, we are social animals. Our societies determine what is right and wrong behavior, but it's hardly objective, and often wrong [emphasis wrong]. Nature of the beast. We must all decide what is moral for ourselves, lest we agree with some principle (such as the form of slavery described in Leviticus 25:44-46) that is not suited to the empathy in a normal conscience. Humans are capable of both social-program type morality, and of self-determination. Sometimes a person self-determines to do harm, so societies come up with ways to punish and discourage such destructive behaviors. So we do determine morality subjectively, on both a cultural and personal level.

Right, so society is NOT the source of objective morality. Nicely done.

Really, all the phrase "objective morality" does is attempt to assert that there is some universal moral law, as claimed in Romans, which is objectively not a reality when we look at the various definitions of what is moral throughout history and cultural studies. Some are more common than others, like not killing, because they are clearly destructive to societies, but every society has exceptions to the rule. The same is true for all the other items. The demonstration of the pro-slavery verses also demonstrates that even religious morality is not "objective", but shifts with time and cultures.

No, the phrase acknowledges the existence of something which we all recognize but struggle to accept as true or define. Even in this thread, opinions vary as to whether moral values are objective or subjective.

Is there ANYTHING you can think of that is ALWAYS wrong no matter what the circumstances?

You know the candidates: child abuse, rape, murder, racial discrimination...

Are you willing to hold that one or more of these is occasionally acceptable?

So the idea that the "Moral Argument" refutes anything is not only ridiculous, it's such an outright and obvious lie that the theist should spot it before making such an assertion contrary to the facts... but they never do. How sad.

To the contrary, the Moral Argument is the Achilles' Hell of atheism. The reason that folks in this thread struggle to refute it and why atheist organization spend money on billboards is because they have not been able to actually answer the questions:

Why is something really wrong and not just a matter of personal preference or group pressure?
How do you know if something is objectively wrong?

---

I mean what decides if you are acting morally?  Your bible?

Apparently eating Shellfish is objectively immoral.  As is being gay, not believing in god, working on Sunday's, having sex before marriage, wearing fabrics of mixed cloth, and masturbating.  

On the other hand it's objectively moral to stone people for being gay, or being raped.  Slavery is also totally a-fucking-okay so long as you don't kill your slaves.  Unless of course, they were having sex before marriage.  Rape's also okay so long as you pay the father for the rape.

Christians especially might want to give up on the argument from fucking morality.  Because they most certainly aren't fucking objective when it comes to morality.

We're not talking about Jewish or Christian morality...we're talking about whether something, ANYTHING is objectively moral.

Simply being a former Christian with a chip on one's shoulder is an incomplete understanding of atheism.

So, take off your anti-Christian glasses, and try to see the world as a theist sees it (or as a true atheist OUGHT to see it).