My dumbass parents doubt evolution

[Truth Matters]

Your god doesn't provide any kind of logic reason for why his morality must be objective. What you do is simply declare that a certain morality is objective just because you believe it is.

a) Irrelevant. God's moral nature is a perfectly sufficient as a Plausible grounding. No other logically possible - much less plausible and sufficient grounding exists to ground an objective moral reality.
YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED A PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVE. You still need one or the premise stands.

b)False. It's not objective because 'I believe it'. I believe it because there is no other rationally possible - much less plausible and sufficient grounding apart from God's existence.

An objective moral reality, on the other hand, must be based on the simple principle that we should increase pleasure and reduce pain. Let me show you why.
Morality, if it exists, must be coherent, otherwise it would be useless. To be coherent, this morality theory must be universal: all human beings share common needs and requirements, so having one rule for one person and the opposite rule for another is impossible; it is like proposing a physics theory that says that some rocks fall down, while others fall up.

We know that a morality must exist because morals are set of rules that deal with preferred behaviors, and we know that preferred behaviors exist because even though choices are almost infinite, most human beings make very similar choices, and therefore not all choices can be equal.

Human beings prefer pleasure to pain. The preferred behaviors therefore therefore is "pursue pleasure and avoid pain".

Therefore any universal moral maxim that increases pleasure and reduces pain is a preferred behavior for humanity as a whole. Therefore, an objective morality must be based on moral maxims that increase pleasure and reduce pain.

This is silly
a) You have completely failed to establish any ontological basis to ground any objective moral reality. You don't even address the Ontology. The objective reality of moral values and duties is an ontological question.

b) You are talking epistemology that pre-supposes an established ontology while your ontology doesn't have any grounding.
You may as well be talking about the correct way to aim at a target that doesn't exist. You are aiming an epistemology at target ontology that you can't rationally claim exists under Atheism.

c) Give me your rationally coherent basis for claiming a serial killer 'ought not' pursue his pleasure to kill and torture others for his personal gratification. Where does that moral 'ought' come from under Atheism?
What makes your personal subjective illusion of a moral 'ought' binding of moral duties for the child rapist or serial killer?
Where is that objective grounding that binds moral 'oughts' irrespective of personal opinions?

d) I played football. I endured pain constantly. What makes causing pain bad - when there is no objective good or bad under Atheism? Are football players morally bad when they hit each other.

You need to ground an objective realm of moral values and duties consistent with Atheism. You haven't even addressed the ontological grounding of a moral reality.

You have failed to disprove anything. You clearly understand the arguments you claim are defeated.

Give me time, and I'll tear down your arguments in a more detailed fashion, one by one.

[/quote]

No you simply have not. You have provided a series of remarks that range from irrelevant to silly. I chose not to waste time commenting on your series of superficial remarks, but instead asked you to pick one argument and see if you can defeat it in serious reason. That's what we are doing now.

---

Are you claiming Atheists hold no belief position on whether or not God exists?

There is no evidence for your god or any of the others invented by men.

Find some and we can examine it.


( P.S. Your fucking bible is not evidence.)

Now try answering my question Spanky.
Provide me your evidence and arguments to justify your Atheist belief.
Don't cower, evade or offer excuses. Deliver those arguments and evidences to justify that Atheist belief.
I'de sure hate to think you're impotent.
Get busy Spanky.


BTW Here is a very cursory outline of some of the best evidences for God. The full arguments and evidences are not NOT adequately explained here. This is a very compacted outline I put together - not comprehensive.

Contingency – God is the best explanation for why something exists rather than nothing? Something cannot begin from nothing without a cause. Therefore, Something necessarily self-exists. Self-existence is logically necessary. A Universe from Self –creation is logically impossible. Our Universe began to exist. Our Universe is not self-existent. Our Universe requires a causally antecedent agency to explain it’s existence. God does not – God has no beginning, but self-exists as prime.

Cosmological – Absolute beginning confirmed by Big Bang cosmology requires a causal agency. Cause of Physical Universe cannot itself be Physical. Must be non-physical, space-less, timeless and willful to cause Physical Universe from Physical Nothingness.

Design: Specified, ordered and integrated interdependencies aimed towards a third-purpose design objectives clearly infer intelligent agency. ‘Chance’ events within limited time-frames cannot rationally account for Design achievements. No sufficient Naturalistic mechanisms or explanations. Intelligent purpose is far more plausible explanation. Origin of radically sophisticated DNA information (software) driving molecular highly sophisticated molecular machines within each cell. Also, the design inference from irreducible complexity cannot and certainly has not been adequately explained.

Precision FINELY TUNED constants and quantities present in initial conditions of the Universe to within infinitesimally narrow ranges to permit life. Universe is precision balanced on razor’s edge. This is virtual mathematical proof of intent – a function of mind – is necessary to explain these precision orderings.

Ontological argument – God is a metaphysically necessary Being. Since God’s attributes are metaphysically possible, and all metaphysical possibilities must also be actual if possible, God must be actual.


Intelligence in Nature: Intelligence, order and reason and information all from Nothingness?

Spiritual instinct of man: Evolved to connect with something not actual?

Free-will: Chemical causation is not free-will. Agency requires a soul.
Chemicals have no moral duties.

Moral Truth / Apprehension of Objective moral truth. Is rape really wrong or just an illusion? Is rape just a natural chemical byproduct caused by electrochemical activity (Atheism) – or an act of will.

Massive Historical evidences of witnessed Miracles, visions, fulfilled prophecies,.

Personal experiences: Ubiquitous NDE’s, supernatural phenomena

Christ’s resurrection witnessed by hundreds.

Absolute failure of Naturalism to explain a Finely tuned Universe, Finite Universe, Sentience, Rational truth and natural order, Moral Law (morality), intuition, intention, intelligence, purpose, free-will…

---

Encyclopedia of Philosophy in my office

Be sure to check out the article on Immanuel Kant sooner or later.

BTW Sorry I accused you of lying.