My views on objective morality

[LadyForCamus]

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

I'm going to call it a night. But, Catholic Lady, I'd like to invite you to stay here in your own thread and work this out with us because you've made it such a big deal. It would be a pity to lose a member such as yourself over misunderstandings.
Maybe the others are mistaken. Obviously you mean a lot to a lot of members here personally, and that is why this is so difficult a subject to talk to you about--but, you brought it up. Maybe there's some straw man argumentation going on from other members of this forum, or maybe you just don't understand what it is you are arguing and the ramifications of such beliefs. Or maybe more! Lots of us here have intensely talked this very scenario out with other theists, and if it seems harsh to you; maybe it just is! Maybe the bible says what you don't believe in, but it does say it and you do seem to have come here as a "representative" of Catholicism.

You're the one with the name "Catholic lady" so it is assumed you follow Catholic doctrine. And Catholic doctrine is what those who are disagreeing with you, are addressing. Additionally you've re-inforced your opinions in my mind, by referring back to your post #618 which implicitly states that you condone gods will, whatever it may be, based upon the free will argument. Please do note that neglect is a form of abuse. Neglecting to stop your dogs from fighting and tearing each others' ears off, for instance, is immoral and illegal where you live, for instance.

Perhaps you could start over with what it is, exactly, that you believe?

Personally I like pertinent discussions and this line of thought and think it's a healthy discussion for you to have. No one (and I will personally see to this as a moderator) will put words into your mouth as to what you believe. From what I've seen, people have been reacting to the fact that you can't believe in god or Catholic doctrine and not believe X Y Z. But, maybe you don't believe in those things. It's a slippery slope that the Catholic Church (and it's many victims) have had to come to terms with. What they believe and what they profess to believe in, can sometimes be two very separate things! 

You may not realize what it is you are saying to us fully, and so I' wont fault you for it (I don't know you I'm just an outsider looking in), but  I think everyone here would like a chance to re-evaluate what it is, exactly, that you believe and try to show you how we reconcile what you believe with what we've been arguing and perhaps come to an understanding that befits you? 
Lady Camu, for instance, has done her best as far as I can see to be respectful and understanding and I don't believe you understand her, actually.  

Secondarily I know it can be quite a shock to find out the reality of god, the implications of his involvement (or lack thereof), and the ramifications of re-evaluating your own beliefs. So, take some time, however long you want, and please do return.

THANK YOU, Luckie. Indeed, I am in no way attempting to attack CL's character. The opposite, in fact. And if all I cared about was just brow beating someone for the fun of it, I would have gotten bored pages ago. I don't understand the mentality behind special pleading. I don't understand how an otherwise intelligent, reasonable person can be cognizant of the fact that they hold a logically contradictory belief, and still defend the belief.

Let me try to make myself PERFECTLY CLEAR one last time:

I do not think that CL would ever actually condone any god's complacency or complicity regarding the rape (and all human suffering) he hypothetically allows in this world. But, I DO think she clings to a special plead; a cognitive dissonance that no matter how you slice it, will inevitably lead to people misinterpreting her position as such.

This bothers me, because I'm pretty sure CL is a kind and empathetic human being, and she refuses to see (in my opinion) how her illogical position has the potential to reflect erroneously on her character. I know that some members here are feeling territorial. I understand this, and I understand why. CL has earned it, and I'm not disputing that. But the fact remains that she is a theist who posted a thread to DEFEND god's objective morality on an atheist forum, and up until now I haven't seen anyone tiptoeing around anybody else's logical contradictions. In fact, I'd say because we respect and care for CL, all the more reason to continue working through the discussion. We are doing her a disservice by rubbing her back and saying, 'don't listen to those meanies, if you think God has his special reasons then maybe he does.' Isn't almost every philosophical debate on this website an opportunity; a challenge for all of us to consider new ideas and increase our self-awareness? Don't we owe each other intellectual honesty?

@CL, I know you're upset with me, and upset in general. Maybe all of this is hitting a nerve...for a reason. Maybe that's a good thing. Or maybe you won't care to participate in conversations with me again after this. Either way, know I will never be too tired or frustrated to continue working through something with you, and that offer is always on the table no matter how angry at me you are.