(March 3, 2014 at 2:20 am)orangebox21 Wrote: The fundamental question remains, however, from an atheistic perspective and through the lens of evolution, given that people are just animals, why is an animal killing another animal wrong?
I object to your use of the phrase, 'just animals,' as if applying it to humans belittled them. Being an animal is one of the coolest conditions in the observed universe. Being an animal involves novelty and complexity seen nowhere else.
Why is an animal killing another animal wrong? Absolutely, it is not. Absolutely, killing humans is not wrong. It is only humans and their imaginary friends who consider killing humans wrong and then only most of the time. If it were absolutely wrong to kill humans, then bears would know this and refuse to kill children. Christians have to deny moral agency to non-humans in the face of observed fact. They do this to maintain a fantasy of human superiority.
Mothering of young, objection to unfairness, risk taking to benefit others are observed moral behaviors in non-humans. You claim such is instinct for others but not humans? You ask for special pleading.
Christians conflate 'absolute' morality with 'objective' morality. They fail to consider that an absolute morality would apply equally to humans, animals and inanimate objects.
Empathy involves the ability to consider the inner reality of individuals other than themselves. Christians recognize little suffering outside of their tribe and nearly none outside of their species.
So how, exactly, does God know that She's NOT a brain in a vat? 
