RE: In UK atheists considred more moral than theists.
August 22, 2018 at 11:20 am
(This post was last modified: August 22, 2018 at 11:28 am by Huggy Bear.)
(August 22, 2018 at 3:20 am)paulpablo Wrote:(August 21, 2018 at 11:41 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: *emphasis mine*
Really?
on this forum:
Some atheists were defending a gay man buggering an under age boy.
Another atheist has stated there 5 people she'd like to kill if she knew she could get away with it.
Another atheist claimed if he lived back in the day, he'd happily participate in chattel slavery.
(I assume you disagree with the above?)
Clearly examples of why an individual's brain isn't capable of deciding what's moral.
I also say you would happily participate in chattel slavery back in the day.
An individuals brain is pretty much incapable of not deciding what's moral at least to some degree.
Children have been fucked, people killed and slaves taken in the name of god too, people deciding what's moral with god added doesn't necessarily equal progression with moral attitudes.
Like I said, hit dogs, holler...
(August 5, 2013 at 9:39 am)paulpablo Wrote: If I was in a situation where I was part of a huge rich family who made money from having slaves who were black I doubt I'd give up my vast fortune, large house, secure family and farm and whatever else just because I feel sorry for a few black people, and I am a person with a lot of empathy in comparison with people I know, but I imagine in a world full of unfairness, poverty and death a few slaves wouldn't weigh heavy on my guilt, since round the time of slaves there were child chimney sweeps and mill workers, people dying of all sorts, and it was a harsh dog eat dog world.
Seeing how I'm a descendant of slaves it's hardly likely that I'd own slaves, not to mention there was this whole abolitionist movement, so not everyone was as morally bankrupt as you're implying.
(August 22, 2018 at 9:08 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: I assumed you understood what 'most' means. I should have known better. And given my assessment of your authenticity and genuineness, it seems likely that some or all of your examples are misrepresentations.
When I don't supply quotes you guys think i'm misrepresenting, when I do supply quotes, I'm quote mining.
You kudosed the above post, as he himself claimed, he considers himself full of empathy, as most likely you yourself do.
Why should I take your claims seriously?
