Where are the Morals?

[Surgenator]

Interesting point is, as if NATURAL SELECTION has worked out “naturally” different versions of all these mystical stories on “creation of man from clay” and spread them in all nations of the world by means of blind, random, and unguided process.

Nope, natural selection doesn't make mystical stories of the creation of man. It only deals with how species change over generations. It is also not blind and not random. So please throw your strawman versions away.

Currently there is no general agreement among biologists on the adaptive function of sex.

Even if this is true, this by no mean your clay people bullshit is true.

In fact, Nazis were on the path of Naturalism in their struggle to make a supreme race.

Yes, atheism is a tenet of communism.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_communism

The argument of improvement is immaterial here, as atheism does not give any moral standards for building and improving moral values.

Atheism doesn't have a moral code. It also doesn't have an us-vs-them mentality, superstitions, and so-called-gods moralilty. In fact it doesn't have anything other than the lack of belief in god(s). So an athiest is forced to come up with their own morality. Considering they're under represented in prison (excluding states that outlaw athiesm), they're doing a pretty good job.

Aisha was not the only woman who has a historical significance and who was married at a young age.

Irrelavent. Other people commiting pedophilia doesn't excuse them nor Muhammad.

So calling paedophile to a person who legally married a young girl by the consent and willingness of her parents, relatives, and community members is quite absurd. No one objected that marriage including the enemies of Prophet because such marriages were widely practiced at the time of Prophet Mohammad

So it's ok as long as the parents let have sex with their 9 year old girl? Thats absurb.

Can you say that parents of all those girls, I have mentioned above including Aisha, were "Child Molesters" because they had given their daughters as legal wives in their young ages?

YES!

No sexual abuse victim had ever spoken positively of her attacker.

Look up "Stockholm syndrome"

Here I believe that atheist is vulnerable to all immoral acts due to lack of morality in atheism.

Atheism doesn't provide a moral code. However, atheist don't lack morality. The come up with one of their own.

A muslim can't say this because Muhammad did it, he's the perfect model for humanity, end of argument.

You are spot on. If you knew the reality of Prophet Mohammad then that knowledge would never let you argue against him.

We know he was a pedophile. So lets here it muslims, "pedophilia is ok."

You don't get to pass beyond 7th century values.

No matter whether man lives in a cave or walks on the moon, the principle senses of all people are same. Advances in science, literature, and philosophy cannot modify primal senses, feelings, and emotions. Those consistent senses, feelings, and emotions are the objective of Islamic teachings. The teachings of Quran and Prophet Mohammad will remain perfectly valid until the day of Armageddon.

Science can modify primal senses, feelings, and emotions. It's called drugs.

Plus, didn't Mohammad split the moon in half according to you? We've been to the moon, and no trace of a splite exist.

If you were a Muslim (which I doubt) then most probably you left Islam to have free sex. Free sex is one of the major temptation that causes theist to become an atheist.

OR ... someone left because they reliaze how bad shit crazy it is.

5 compare to 95 is substantially a small number and intuitively obvious on its face however, if you exhibit 5 prisoners out of 100 to manifest prodigious morality of atheists compare to theists then this is by large a MISREPRESENTATION.

1.6% of atheist in the US. 0.07% of atheist in prison. Who is doing the misrepresentation?

Religion gives specific knowledge about good and bad therefore it is not like atheism that faces dilemma of distinguishing between what is good and what is bad. Even the belief that God is the creator of everything is sufficient to give a distinction between good and bad.

Let me correct that for you
"Religion gives no knowledge about good and bad therefore it is not like atheism that faces dilemma of distinguishing between what is good and what is bad. Even the belief that God is the creator of everything is will not give a distinction between good and bad."

Atheism provokes relativism. Yesterday, homosexuality was an immoral and abnormal act but today it is a permissible act on consensus and perhaps tomorrow it would be inescapable.

Homosexuality was never immoral. Stupid religious people only claimed it was. You should learn the difference between claims and reality.

I have already expressed my views that out of 7 billion people, Atheist have not yet reached even 200 million mark. This fact is enough to state that atheism is irrational, illogical, and goes against the nature of man.

Appeal to popularity fallacy.

Manmade laws lead humanity to relativism. There are no universal values in atheism which in fact leads humanity to dictatorship where the powerful has right to impose his desired laws over the feeble. Atheism pushes people to the law of jungle where the feeble should suffer for the enjoyment of the powerful.

Godmade laws lead humanity to atrocities.

Quran teaches that fornication, adultery, incest (based on consensus or not), homosexuality, alcoholism, gambling, disrespect to elder parents, disrespect to neighbours, meanness ... are the acts which are illogical, irrational, and against nature of man and therefore sins. I committedly agree with all that.

I wonder that it includes pedophelia .... nope not here.

Islam is based on standards set by God, which are not conditional to cultural customs. Therefore, if homosexuality and adultery were sins yesterday, they are sins today and they will be sins tomorrow regardless of changing trends of influential cultures.

In today’s world, other than Quran, all scriptures are corrupted versions of their originals. Therefore, any religion that is based on corrupted scripture classified as UNRELIABLE.

Harris Wrote: Hence, atheists are left with no other choice than to peek into religion in pursuit of moral guidance.

Funny, religions seem to be haltingly catching up to humanist moral standards.

John N Gray
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray_(philosopher)


An atheist, thinks that Humanism is nothing more than an empty figure of speech – a secular version of theism in which atheists have replaced the idea of God’s providence with a conviction about the nature of progress.

What part of "there is no athiest spokes person" do you not understand? You seem to always want to tell us what we think instead of listenning to what we actually think.

And, all those Secular Greeks were riding on the backs of deities just like secular governments in contemporary world are riding on the backs of Christians, Muslims, and Jews.

Atheism is not a word that's properly capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence or as part of the name of an organization. No atheist has the authority to speak for all of us.

That makes the difference.

“No atheist has the authority to speak for all of us,” because there are no universal standards in atheism. Every atheist has his own fabricated morals independent of others so why to listen other.

Because the atheist can come up with better morals if they discuss them instead of proclaiming a higher morals because I-have-god-on-my-side.