Unconventional Religion

[Consilius]

I think a formal understanding of morals is no more necessary to moral activity than a formal understanding of grammar is to being an expert speaker of a language.

I agree. What we consider right and wrong is not independent of our nature. When we DO do things wrong, it is therefore a perversion of the natural order, a derailment from perfection. Perfectly consistent with the Bible, which is just a different way of saying what we already know.

---

So the next time I see a suspicious stranger on my street, I should feel free to attack him or if I see a particularly curvacious chick, I should feel free to jump her - since those morals have an evolutionary basis.

The essence of evolutionary altruism is that we all work together. Rape does not produce a productive environment for raising a human child.

The lesson here is obvious - give up money for morals.

I don't remember saying that. I can value something more than another and still enjoy both.

What it says actually is "Money is evil and therefore, so is the love for it".

The love of it is "the root of all evil". Nobody said that liking money was inherently evil. It depends on what you do with it. Simple truth.

Tell me, if you consider the early church to be "truly" Christian, why don't you share your possessions with the poor "equally"?

I do share my possessions with the poor. Of course, I will never have enough to give everybody. The early Christian church gave the poor anything they needed, so all of them were equally satisfied. No one said that everyone owned the same stuff.

Unless you believe that your Christ was lying to this guy and sending him on a fool's errand, the answer is pretty clear - give up your money to get into heaven.

Restating what you said earlier without any further mention of my argument because you really, really, want it to say that, so you get to tell me how much better you are.

Give your children lots of love and free hugs instead of food and toys and see how happy and joyful they'd be.

So you only loved your parents while they were in the position to take care of you.

Firstly, do you understand the difference between life and survival?

"Life" is the state of being alive. "Survival" is the practice of staying alive. I'm not seeing how this is relevant to your claim.

Because it wasn't disadvantageous to them. Their investment in me is paying off quite well.

So your parents only loved you while you didn't hinder their financial ambitions. Do the parents of the mentally challenged not love their children?

Do you even know what are the "consequences" that we might lose sight of?

Materialism. Selfishness. Greed.