@emjay I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not trying to disrespect anyone here, purely taking the logic to its outcome. That's all. I'm not implying, suggesting that non-believers cannot be moral. That's not true at all. I believe quite a few could be more moral than myself. I will say I'm a bit disappointed in seeing so many replies taking offense to "don't tell me what I believe". The irony in that statement when throughout this entire forum is telling theists what we believe. When at the same time you know we are all individuals and have our own beliefs. Unity of belief does not necessitate uniformity. Not all that proclaim to be atheists believe the same things. So I apologize if I painted with any broad brush as there was no intent to do so.
@Fake Messiah your points are well taken. Yes cultural acceptance of acts is of course subjective to the surroundings, the time, etc. But the fact that what you describe is no longer accepted, did it make it "right" before but wrong now? I will fully admit there are dilemma's like would you steal food so your family doesn't starve or the Anne Frank dilemma of lying to save the lives of others.
I will never espouse to have answers to all the questions. I simply look for civil discourse of those that do not share my worldview. To be challenged in my belief.
My position is as such. Making a moral judgment against the God of the Bible, while maintaining a worldview that there are no objective morals, is nothing more than opining on personal preference. But what I see in others making moral judgments against God is the presupposition that the judgment is objectively true, while denying objective morals existence. Nietzsche was a quack we can all agree, but on this he was right. The judgments being made against God borrow from the Christian view of morals, while denying those morals are correct.
@Fake Messiah your points are well taken. Yes cultural acceptance of acts is of course subjective to the surroundings, the time, etc. But the fact that what you describe is no longer accepted, did it make it "right" before but wrong now? I will fully admit there are dilemma's like would you steal food so your family doesn't starve or the Anne Frank dilemma of lying to save the lives of others.
I will never espouse to have answers to all the questions. I simply look for civil discourse of those that do not share my worldview. To be challenged in my belief.
My position is as such. Making a moral judgment against the God of the Bible, while maintaining a worldview that there are no objective morals, is nothing more than opining on personal preference. But what I see in others making moral judgments against God is the presupposition that the judgment is objectively true, while denying objective morals existence. Nietzsche was a quack we can all agree, but on this he was right. The judgments being made against God borrow from the Christian view of morals, while denying those morals are correct.
We are not made happy by what we acquire but by what we appreciate.
