My views on objective morality

[bennyboy]

So you're saying that all theists, because they are theists, deserve to be treated in the same disrespectful manner.  Who they are and what their qualities are as people shouldn't enter into it.  Wow.

CL has started a thread about a very legitimate and serious philosophical question without doing her homework. Even Harris took the time to watch a bunch of videos, to put together a string of ideas, and to cite references. I started plenty respectful, asking her philosophical questions about her ideas, and after about 30 pages of "La la la, objective morality, rape is objectively evil, God is good," and nothing else, and the ridiculous way in which you and others were treating philosophical challenges as personal attacks against your new buddy, I pointed out that double standard. Live with it.

This is what I do, and will continue to do, everytime a theist enters the "Philosophy" section with wishy-thinking, and I don't much care how nice people think that particular theist is, since that's irrelevant to the doing of philosophy.  I mean, look at the outrageously offensive shit Rhythm has said to me and vice versa, and we were at least attempting to put together logical ideas-- where was the talk of mod action then?  There was none.  So from whence does this double standard come that a theist can invade my precious Philosophy section spewing wishy-thinking with very little attempt to support it with. . . ya know. . . IDEAS and LOGIC and EVIDENCE and stuff?

Never got the memo that the philosophy section was now under your personal direction.  Whatever you think philosophy is all about you sure as hell don't speak for me.

I don't have a problem giving hostile atheists room to work through their shit but no you don't get to be an upfront asshole and have all atheists fall in behind you because its really us against them.  Grow the hell up.  I'm tired of your sorry act.

I like the philosophy section because people try to. . . oh I don't know. . . do philosophy and stuff. So long as someone is really putting their all their effort into that, I will debate-- and pleasantly-- until the cows come home. But I don't think CL is a great logician who happens to be nice. I think she's being a nice person IN LIEU of making sufficient arguments, and that this is disrespectful to people who enjoy actually doing philosophy.

As for you-- do you think so little of CL that you have to be her champion? Fine. Let's start a 1 vs. 1 debate, and you can argue how coherent the God idea is, and how rape, while being objectively evil, is sometimes necessary in a universe created by an all-powerful God. No? Then stop throwing up a smoke-screen and let's get back to arguing about the OP, rather than what a cutie-pie sweetheart CL is, and what a big bad meanie I am.

Because the difference between me and 90% of the people piling onto this thread-- on both sides-- is that I'm actually interested in arguing about what objective morality is, and whether it's even a coherent idea.