Objective/subjective morals

[Simon Moon]

Moron...

It is not curious at all. There are many studies on this subject that explain the reason for this, but since your religion beat any semblance of your natural sense of curiosity out of you, you are clueless.

And the worst thing is, your ignorance if correctable. Just a bit of research and reading will cure it.

sigh

Cannibalism isn't the point LOL. As far as the concerns on morality goes people don't get to change the rules god has for them but if you're going to say all that is subjective and it's up to you. One minute it's not cool to eat your friend, next minute it is, how is anyone going trust a guy like that?

Since I am an atheist that believes that secular morality does not have to be subjective, this is meaningless. See my post #17 on the first page of this thread.

The reason why it is never cool to eat my friend, is because it harms his/her well being. Just like slavery has always been wrong, even if your god once condoned it and created rules for keeping slaves (Exodus 21). Just like genocide has always been wrong, even when your god ordered it. How do I know these have always been wrong? Because they harm the well being of those that were the victims.

Are you saying, that if you didn't have your god beliefs, you might think it is cool to eat your friend?

Those (72%) of all scientists that are atheists certainly are rebellious. Rebels are usually known for getting straight A's in high school, spending another 8 years in college, giving their thesis, then dedicating the rest of their lives to their scientific field of study.

I would hardly call high school nerds "rebels" lol, in fact, the smarter a person the more likely he or she is trainable to fit into a mindset, after all "smartness" in any field really is just a measure of your learning capacity. If I had to follow your logic I'd say the smarter a person the more likely he or she will NOT leave faith. Anyway, being smart isn't everything in life. Most super smart people were loners with mental diseases and suicidal tendencies, not that I'm in any way belittling their accomplishments but let's not romanticize their 'dedication'.

I'll skip this, since it looks like you missed my sarcasm.

So, your religious views in our profile state "atheist turned Christian", and I have no reason to doubt that you once were an atheist. But what I am curious of, is what was the demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument that convinced you that a god exists?

Spirituality related things are nothing like that. You don't wake up one day, see some evidence and turn into a believer. It's a combination of things, it's about seeing the bigger picture, it's mostly a feeling than a thought, it's more an experience than a thesis, so really, you will have to experience it in order to understand it and in order to experience it you will have to open up your mind. Not that I'm asking you to open up your mind or anything, just explaining how I got there, you're the one that has to set the sail on your boat.

I have the ability to see the big picture. I still see no evidence of a god.

So, you claim it is mostly feelings. Is it possible that feelings could be wrong? Please explain how feelings are a reliable path to ruth?

There are a billion and a half Muslims, many claim they can also feel the presence of their god. If feelings are such a great path to the truth, why did it lead 1.5 billion Muslims to the wrong god? Or 1 billion Hindus?

The number of supernatural claims is huge (crystal healing, Tarot cards, dowsing, auras, chakras, etc, etc, etc). Many people also believe these based on feelings. Again, feelings are not a reliable path to truth.

I am a very open minded person. I am willing to believe any claim that is supported by demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument. Without these, what should be my justification to believe a god exists?

On a side note, when was the 'spiritual realm' demonstrated to exist? You just sort of throw it in as if it was a given.