There is no objective Morality

[Violet]

Stating that rape is not objectively wrong only proves that the idea of objective right and wrong are utter nonsense.

Why would rape be objectively wrong? I think that the only thing your disagreement with it proves is that objectivity is nonsense for you (and you are a subjective being).

I can even see some very suggestive reasons for rape not being 'wrong' in a subjective context... but what does understanding that gain you?

---

Right, because some outmoded, misguided priorities in some cultures automatically means we're all heartless assholes.

What makes their culture 'outmoded' or 'misguided' any more than your own?

You seem to have struck the upon the 'heartless asshole' argument all on your own.

---

Rape isn't wrong just because it destabilizes society. It's because we, as animals that are capable of empathy, understand just how much it hurts the victim. We are moved to try and do our best to comfort them and prevent someone else from undergoing the same suffering.

I wasn't aware rape had the power to 'destabilize' society unless it becomes systematic, at which point the eating of oranges also upsets the 'stability'. Rabid orange fanatics, I swear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-VBwa2FY5M

Some of us are moved, others of us are not. Why do presume you can speak for all of us?

Does it really matter if our morality has an objective basis? Studies have shown that humans from different cultures and backgrounds respond very similarly when posed moral dilemmas. Some human traits are simply universal, and can even be seen historically in the laws of civilizations that are similar even though they are isolated from one another.

Does it really matter if some hooker gets raped? Surely some studies must have shown that only fanatical college kids and your occasional feminazi give two shits what happens to people they don't know, and never will know. Because murdering, raping, theiving bastards aren't human, right? They couldn't be, since nonrapeymonsterness is clearly a universal human trait, as can be seen clearly with your average porn site. And wars never happen, I mean: get real, dawg!

I'm not really getting what the OP is trying to say here. Is he saying that morality from an atheistic point of view isn't valid because it has no objective basis? That's simply not the case since most atheists are just as law-abiding and moral as any other person you'd care to name.

I'm not sure what he's saying either, since I saw sciency bullshit in a philosophical thread, and reasonably decided that if he had any interesting input he'd get to it later, maybe in a smaller post with fewer completely pointless diagrams about concrete, in the same vein of 'why can't religion have anything concrete'

What's an objective basis look like?

* Violet takes a big bite out of everything.

Yup, that tasted purple!

Further, how does being law-abiding matter? And why are you assuming that everyone I might care to name is either 'moral' or 'law-abiding'? Yeah sure, we all follow them thar assassin's credes and the pirate's code!