(June 21, 2013 at 8:37 am)John V Wrote: Please. Let's review. Your argument is:
1. All your red herring evasion does you no good because religious-based morality has all the same problems.
2. Religious-based morality, in addition to all the conundrums with secular morality, dumps a load of worthless "virtues" and harmless "sins" on top.
3. You need to justify #2 or else admit that religious-based morality complicates the issue needlessly and is therefore inferior.
Quote:However, it's not a given that simplicity is superior.
Yeah, actually it is, especially when the added complexity is needless and not helpful.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
