Objective Morality?

[theVOID]

Desirism and Contractatrianism are 2 such examples.

Well... I agree with the former to an extent, my own moral framework came from desirism, especially it's reductionist outlook centered around value theory. Contractarianism is however false, social contracts don't exist, it's also flawed in that morality must be defined as abiding by a contract, and I don't really buy the notion that something is either morally good or bad based on whether or not it is in line with this "social contract".

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.

Well said

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

Based on what framework do you make these claims? I happen to agree with them for the record, but I'd like to know the mechanics of how you arrived at being able to claim these to be morally wrong.

---

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.

I refer to the COMPLETE BULLSHIT in bold above.

If homosexuality is not "Natural", as in does not arise from natural processes, then it is by definition artificial, last time I checked though there weren't scientists running around various mammalian populations injecting the young with a "gay virus" so they would develop an attraction to the same sex.

And if Homosexuality is "unnatural" because it "goes against nature" then isn't a volcano that wipes out a pregnant animal also "unnatural"? After all, both have the effect of removing reproductive possibilities, and that was the only criteria you even attempted to list for why homosexuality qualifies as "unnatural".

Homosexuality is at worst "Abnormal".

Do not misunderstand, I believe that they have the rights of all in this country, except for those things that are against scripture.

And this is the problem with you theist/authoritarian assholes. YOU are completely free to live your own life according to WHATEVER fucking fairy tales you like, but you assholes don't get to make OTHER people abide by your sycophantic little delusion. Feel free to try and convince them all you like, but legislating it for no other reason than it's written in your copy of "mother goose" is something that makes me want to re-open Auschwitz and jam you all inside.