(October 11, 2021 at 8:10 pm)ayost Wrote:(October 11, 2021 at 7:32 pm)HappySkeptic Wrote: Would you go around murdering just because you don't believe in God? Given that most people don't believe in Jesus, how it is possible that most people don't go around murdering, and every society has rules against it? Is a god the only possible explanation?
Sure, a society could choose to see the movie "The Purge" as a holy inspiration, and decide that Purges are moral imperatives. However, the suffering is real, and those with empathy would fight against it. It doesn't take a belief in God to realize that its a screwed up idea. In fact, it is a belief in God (or a belief in other extreme ideologies) that allows many to ignore things like empathy and the suffering of others, and do what most of us would consider "evil".
Where do morals come from? Our common humanity and empathy, and our ability to understand how principles affect future happiness or suffering. Yes, people disagree on the principles of that last point. Some thing that dancing is wrong because will arouse unstoppable lecherous desires, while some think that being free with sexuality leads to a happier life. Different principles, but both ideally have a the aim to reduce suffering and maximize happiness.
You’re being way to flippant and not truly looking at the depth of the world’s depravity. Obviously, there’s the atrocities in China and North Korea. There’s genital mutilation in the Middle East. Cannibals in India. Sex trafficking in America. Slavery in Africa. There’s a tribe in Papua New Guinea where boys are required to perform oral sex on the elders until the boys are old enough ejaculate. Trust me, the world is not full of people who all agree on what’s right and what’s wrong. That’s not true in any sense.
(October 11, 2021 at 7:33 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: So, which Christians get to decide what the correct interpretation of the infallible moral word is, and how can we tell if their interpretation is right? Should we be putting gay men to death?
I already granted that there’s not God to start this conversation so that we could fully explore the inconsistency in the atheist moral worldview.
(October 11, 2021 at 7:21 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Still waiting for you to demolish my worldview.
That’s been happening since you started talking. You’ll never admit it, but your worldview is bankrupt.
(October 11, 2021 at 5:48 pm)pocaracas Wrote: And that is why they commit suicide.
Like TGN said, killing does involve increasing the amount of suffering and I don't think anyone can have the authority to ascertain if the suffering due to abuse is greater than the suffering due to being killed. That should be left to the criteria of the person in the particular situation.
And, since you like the parallel, it's like abortion. Leave it to the person who is in the particular situation (and I mean the potential mother).
I just made a compelling argument, using your worldview, that killing foster kids reduces suffering. All you did is arbitrarily assume that suffering increases to a point my example fails without actually addressing the foundation of the argument, which is that moral system is bankrupt and it doesn’t work. Its arbitrary and inconsistent and it only works when people do what you already agree with.
It’s actually an argument that abortion advocates use to defend abortion. As a side note, she’s not a potential mother, she’s a mother and if she gets and abortion she’s just the mother of a dead baby.
In my opinion, a more compelling argument than the “arbitrary levels of unmeasurable suffering” is the idea that an immoral action is any action that, should everyone do that action all of the time, would bring an end to humanity.
Of course, the person who says that has to admit homosexuality, transgenderism, and abortion are immoral. Obviously, since no one is a neutral truth seeker, their political views will override their need for consistency and they will violate their own moral system.
But, should that person be consistent, I would be compelled by that argument.
I know no one’s talking to me, but I’d like to interject just for a moment and point out that a foetus is not a baby.
You may now return to your previously scheduled screeching.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax