Where are the Morals?

[Mudhammam]

Most of my responses are no more than two or three sentences long. However, how many queries and critiques you guys submit that many responses I am giving.

Person has a choice to believe in the existence of God or not. You have chosen not to believe. You can fashion your own justification to please and satisfy your own self and be happy with all that.

If your belief makes your behaviour aversive and arrogant then there is a defect somewhere in your belief system.

I admire your childlike simplicity. However, I'm truly confounded by your notion that a person chooses his or her beliefs about the reality that is fostered upon them. I didn't chose to disbelieve in God. I chose to consider the evidence pro and con and as a consequence, was forced to doubt the credibility of those arguments in favor of Its existence.

Harris Wrote: … “there was no law of nature that man should love mankind, and that, if there had been any love on earth hitherto, it was not owing to a natural law, but simply because men have believed in immortality. Ivan Fyodorovitch added in parenthesis that the whole natural law lies in that faith, and that if you were to destroy in mankind the belief in immortality, not only love but every living force maintaining the life of the world would at once be dried up. Moreover, nothing then would be immoral, everything would be lawful, even cannibalism. That’s not all. He ended by saying that for every individual, like ourselves, who does not believe in God or immortality, the moral law of nature must immediately be changed into the exact contrary of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to crime, must become not only lawful but even recognised as the inevitable, the most rational, even honourable outcome of his position.’”

Page 45 The Brothers Karamazov
Part 1, Book 2, Chapter 6 ("Why Is Such a Man Alive? ")
Fyodor Dostoevsky

More nonsense from dead authors.

Now Fyodor Dostoevsky is nonsense. By the way, he had told a great truth.

“who does not believe in God or immortality, the moral law of nature must immediately be changed into the exact contrary of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to crime, must become not only lawful but even recognised as the inevitable, the most rational, even honourable outcome of his position.”

You have totally abolished God and moral accountability from your life and this has automatically focused all your rationality to the loci of your pleasures seeking behaviour. You are blindly promoting prostitution, homosexuality, incest, fornication, and all other forms of illegal sex in the name of consensus. You have made homosexuality not only lawful but also inevitable, most rational, even honourable by superseding all health issues such as:

Fyodor Dostoevsky indeed spoke many great truths ("Rebellion" is one of the finest statements on the Problem of Evil that I've ever read) but again, you're simplistic understanding shines through when you confuse the views expressed by his fictional characters with a) his own views (which one can still rightly disagree with) and b) facts and/or generalizations about one person's POV as it relates to all of society. Then, of course, you falsely equate homosexuality with "pleasure seeking behavior," including, as you describe it, incest (Oh yeah? Care to tell us more?) and "all other forms of illegal sex," demonstrating that not only are you a dunce but also a douchebag.