RE: Do you agree with Richard Dawkins?
June 3, 2012 at 1:04 pm
(This post was last modified: June 3, 2012 at 1:14 pm by AthiestAtheist.)
(May 15, 2012 at 4:48 am)Jinkies Wrote: Is your argument that most people here eat meat, and this is not a vegetarian site, therefore the arguments here are obviously going to be absolute shit? I don't agree if that's your point. I pointed out a number of flaws in some of the arguments here, but not all arguments on a site such as this are necessarily going to be that terrible. I'm not sure why you think so poorly of people such as yourself, but honestly not everyone has such poor arguments as you.No, I'm saying that the number of meat-eating atheists is proportional to the number of meat-eaters in real life. It's simple math, and if you could do it, you wouldn't be so shocked.
(May 15, 2012 at 4:48 am)Jinkies Wrote: Wait, so your "instinct" affects the types of food your body can consume? That's amazing! While James Randi hasn't touched on this topic exactly, you should totally contact him as soon as possible. There's no fucking way he won't give you that million bucks for having some sort of magical body.No, but my instinct tells me what I can and should eat. That is a rather basic ability that all animals possess. Are you saying that it is physically impossible to eat meat? Well I hate to break it to ya, but I can!
(May 15, 2012 at 4:48 am)Jinkies Wrote: Also, desire and instinct are not the same thing. You should educate yourself about what instincts actually are before claiming that they are what drive your behavior in this area.I know the difference, and in this case it is instinct. I want the latest cellphone; the urge to eat meat is a bit different than that.
(May 15, 2012 at 4:48 am)Jinkies Wrote: I kept going on about morality because people kept giving shit arguments that I responded to. How are you missing that?How do you keep missing the fact that your arguments are not logical as well? There is nothing logical about why eating meat is "immoral". Those are two separate fields.
(June 3, 2012 at 3:50 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote: I don't really see eating meat as a moral issue. It's the killing of animals for food when we do not need to that I view as immoral. I just find killing things that don't need to be killed isn't a very moral action. So, I don't do it.But we need to kill them in order to eat them, and we need to eat them so we can... live! Is there anything wrong with that?
(June 3, 2012 at 3:50 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote: But I wouldn't expect anybody else to become veggie just because I have my moral objections. In fact, I wouldn't think much of a person who did!I wish more people were like that.
(May 24, 2012 at 7:49 am)jain.rahul Wrote: An Atheist doesn't have any moral basis by which he can define what is good and what is bad objectively as far as I know.So you're telling me you have never heard of reason? How old are you?
(June 3, 2012 at 3:50 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote: Someone who believes in God, goes on the word of God as to what is Good and what is bad.And God doesn't exist, so your morality is based on, drumroll please...
"Sisters, you know only the north; I have traveled in the south lands. There are churches there, believe me, that cut their children too, as the people of Bolvangar did--not in the same way, but just as horribly. They cut their sexual organs, yes, both boys and girls; they cut them with knives so that they shan't feel. That is what the Church does, and every church is the same: control, destroy, obliterate every good feeling. So if a war comes, and the Church is on one side of it, we must be on the other, no matter what strange allies we find ourselves bound to."
-Ruta Skadi, The Subtle Knife
-Ruta Skadi, The Subtle Knife