Objective Morality?

[Godscreated]

These questions answer themselves and are no mystery. Whether an action is right or wrong (independent of its subsequent discovery), stems from whether it is objectively wrong to act in such a manner. You do not need god to act as a standard or anchor to a moral framework for it to be objective. Ethicists who work in this field recoginise this and there are well documented moral frameworks that describe an non-theistic basis for objective morality. Desirism and Contractatrianism are 2 such examples. Now they may be right or wrong, but should automatically be prefererd as simpler explanations to an unverifiable and meaningless god concept. What the theist is really saying is that there is an absolute morality decided by a god; which is holed by the Euthyphro dilemma. There are also many things christianity cannot account for however, but non-thesitic objective morality can. I can say that it is morally wrong:

- to commit genocide
- to hold someone guilty for the crimes of our ancestors
- to claim that babies are born evil
- to hold that the worth of a man is not based on his actions but his beliefs
- that you should receive infinite punshment for finite 'crimes'
- to rape victims of war crimes

How does Christianity account for these moral judgements or would it describe them as morally neutral and subject to Gods arbitration only. Furthermore to become a Christian you must borrow from our secular worldviews in order to make the decision. You are deciding that you like certain moral codes which predate but are also present in Christianity, dismissing others as 'overturned' by Jesus (though he never claimed that). Meaning you cannot account for the mroal decision to be Christian, by using Christianity. Thus Christianity cannot, and necessarily cannot appeal to its own moral validity.

The Christian decides to surrender his will on the basis of his values of mysticism, submission, sacrifice, faith and opposition to the natural – just like the atheist decides to affirm his will on the basis of his own values of rationality, honesty and support for the natural. And all these values can be rationally evaluated, putting the action of “following Christianity and sacrificing some of one’s values” on an inferior moral ground to following one’s personal values fully.

I refer to the bold above, I'm the one who put it in bold. I say really, just read through this forum and you will see that some atheist here are not completely honest and as for supporting the natural, homosexuality is not natural it goes against nature, it is completely nonproductive and many atheist on this forum have stated that they support homosexuality. Do not misunderstand, I believe that they have the rights of all in this country, except for those things that are against scripture.