(June 24, 2013 at 6:50 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Species? Sure, if morality can even apply in a survival context.
According to several atheists on here, morality is defined by survival. Are they wrong?
(June 24, 2013 at 6:58 pm)Rhythm Wrote: So what? Many people could be wrong, don't ad pop me bro!
It’s up to you to prove their wrong, you keep asserting morals are relative but have done nothing to support that fringe claim.
Quote:exactly what I said...........
You gave no proof, you simply asserted it. Give me something to work with at least!
Quote:A good question. But ultimately -why- any standard is chosen is inconsequential so long as those who offer it are honest about their standard. You are free to disagree...and this will lead to moral relativism.Not if my standard of morality is objectively true, relativism refuted.
Quote: Why this standard? "That is my preference". Done and done.
So you’re admitting that atheistic morals are arbitrary and therefore meaningless?