Atheists; what do you base your morals on?

[DeistPaladin]

Probably it would look like the government taxing people at very, very high rates and using it to support social programs that the people didn't want to pay for, and ignoring the ways that people already deal with those issues in their communities. Actually, that is what is happening right now.

***Facepalm***

Assuming you're American, what alternate reality do you live in?

The state wants to force people to pay for things that many people don't want, money that explicitly goes to secular programs that cannot be easily used for religious programs.

This is very authoritarian.

This is the separation of church and state.

If you object to social programs, this is an economic/political issue that has nothing to do with atheism or humanism. Again, talk to some of our resident atheist-libertarians and I think you'll find common ground.

It would also force people to accept political correctness as an enforced, public morality, as it is presently done in universities. Try working at a university and writing a book about why homosexuality is wrong. They will say it is hate speech. They have "non-discrimination laws" that make it "illegal" to discriminate against anyone, except the 80% of Americans who are Christian and others who are religious.

Not all atheists are liberal fascists, but some are.

Remember that rule I provided about "tell it on the mountain but not Capitol Hill"?

Here's another simple rule to help us all get along:
Stopping you from oppressing me isn't oppressing you.

---

As I have to see my hard-won tax money subsidizing churches, energy producers, big banks and the military-industrial complex against my will, I think all I can say is get the fuck over it.

The Iraq War that W lied us into has cost taxpayers some 3 Trillion Dollars, not counting what other countries suckered into it spent.

By the election of 2004, it was obvious W had lied us into that war, that all the wild claims of WMD and links to Al Qaida were not even sort of true.

Therefore, any voter who voted for W Bush in 2004 should pay a special tax to raise the 3 Trillion dollars to pay for the war they tacitly approved of.

Until we get to do that, I don't want to hear one more Republican whine about having to pay for food stamps or whatever.

[jstrodel]

Not all atheists are liberal fascists, but some are.

Isn't this an oxymoron? "Liberal Fascist"… Is that like a conservative communist?

ETA: Jinx, Darkstar…

Also Darkstar, "liberal fascism" is not meant to be a political science term, it is more of a way of describing the irony of advocating for increased taxation and more government controls on the way that money is spent and supposedly being the part of freedom.

I will admit, most of the democrats in the US seem to be very moderate. Elsewhere, the risk of socialism where liberals start to control everything is a real serious risk.

---

What do taxes have to do with humanism? I think you might be lumping all the "dirty words" together into a convenient holding place, some of them may get confused in the process.

A for-profit gov, for example, could raise their money any way they saw fit - support a social program - and that would still seem t fall within the remit of what you think humanism means - social programs-. Would that be a problem?

Humanism is a liberal movement. Do you know who John Rawls is or the concept of distributive justice?

from wikipedia:
"Secular humanism is a comprehensive life stance or world view which embraces human reason, metaphysical naturalism, altruistic morality and distributive justice, and consciously rejects supernatural claims, theistic faith and religiosity, pseudoscience, and perceived superstition.[52][53][54] It is sometimes referred to as Humanism (with a capital H and no qualifying adjective).

The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the world union of more than 100 Humanist, rationalist, irreligious, atheistic, Bright, secular, Ethical Culture, and freethought organizations in more than 40 countries. The "Happy Human" is the official symbol of the IHEU as well as being regarded as a universally recognised symbol for secular humanism."

[Baalzebutt]

The state wants to force people to pay for things that many people don't want, money that explicitly goes to secular programs that cannot be easily used for religious programs.

This is very authoritarian.

Yeah, and you can bitch about that when your church starts paying some fucking taxes, asshole.

[jstrodel]

I'd just like to have the cold comfort that as the government is kicking down my bedroom door and lecturing to me how I live my private life that my Christian masters are at least living by their own rulebook.

Fair enough. I would not really consider myself to agree with some of the craziness that comes from the religious right, but I think a good case can be made for both economic liberty (with concern for the poor, taxation, etc) and Christianity. I think they are somewhat related, but some exploit this and some are incompetents.

I think you're blending religion and economic stances. There are quite a few atheist libertarians on this forum.

I know that there are atheist libertarians, God bless them. Anyone with the integrity to realize that a belief that permits an at best, extremely tenuous understanding of ethics and sees that and accepts that maybe they shouldn't become a socialist messiah wins my respect.

[Darkstar]

I will admit, most of the democrats in the US seem to be very moderate.

Unlike the conservatives.

Elsewhere, the risk of socialism where liberals start to control everything is a real serious risk.

I'm no expert in politics...
*Suddenly realizes it doesn't need to be disproven unless jstrodel provides actual evidence to support it*

---

Anyone with the integrity to realize that a belief that permits an at best, extremely tenuous understanding of ethics and sees that and accepts that maybe they shouldn't become a socialist messiah wins my respect.

(Bolding mine)
Interesting choice of words...

---

---

[jstrodel]

I'm no expert in politics...
*Suddenly realizes it doesn't need to be disproven unless jstrodel provides actual evidence to support it*

1/5th of the world is under Communism and vast other parts of Europe and elsewhere have leftist governments where the state substantially affects the way that societies develop. I am not going to make the claim that a massive public sector is the same as authoritarian communism, but it is authoritarianism. It can do some good though.

If you want evidence, look at your paycheck. See the parts of it which the government takes out. Someone takes the and moves it somewhere else.


I am not against all government social programs. The Bible says that people should redistribute wealth in the Old Testament. The issue for me is the future. What dominates peoples lives, it is the state or something else? What do people talk about and think about most of the time? Is it politics or other things? Who employs people? What does the education system look like, is it to indoctrinate in the ideology of the state or is it for other ends?

---

Anyone with the integrity to realize that a belief that permits an at best, extremely tenuous understanding of ethics and sees that and accepts that maybe they shouldn't become a socialist messiah wins my respect.

(Bolding mine)
Interesting choice of words...

Darkstar, are you aware of the use of irony to communicate contradictions? You seem to be unware of this and point out my intentional use of these terms such as "liberal fascism" and "socialist messiah" as some sort of factual error, as opposed to the intentional irony that it is.

[downbeatplumb]

1/5th of the world is under Communism

You mean china. where the stuff comes from.

and vast other parts of Europe and elsewhere have leftist governments where the state substantially affects the way that societies develop.

For instance?
You had better not look at England where our right wing government is destroying our country bit by bit.

I am not going to make the claim that a massive public sector is the same as authoritarian communism, but it is authoritarianism. It can do some good though.

A large amount of public servants is a large amount of people serving the country. It is only authoritarian if you have a government that is authoritarian and in america you don't.

If you want evidence, look at your paycheck. See the parts of it which the government takes out. Someone takes the and moves it somewhere else.

Are you bitching about tax!

I am not against all government social programs. The Bible says that people should redistribute wealth in the Old Testament. The issue for me is the future. What dominates peoples lives, it is the state or something else? What do people talk about and think about most of the time? Is it politics or other things? Who employs people? What does the education system look like, is it to indoctrinate in the ideology of the state or is it for other ends?

Oh for fucks sake.

[Jackalope]

You seem to be unware of this and point out my intentional use of these terms such as "liberal fascism" and "socialist messiah" as some sort of factual error, as opposed to the intentional irony that it is.

Irony, or hyperbole? Looks more like the latter to me.

[The Grand Nudger]

Humanism is a liberal movement. Do you know who John Rawls is or the concept of distributive justice?

from wikipedia:
"Secular humanism is a comprehensive life stance or world view which embraces human reason, metaphysical naturalism, altruistic morality and distributive justice, and consciously rejects supernatural claims, theistic faith and religiosity, pseudoscience, and perceived superstition.[52][53][54] It is sometimes referred to as Humanism (with a capital H and no qualifying adjective).

The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the world union of more than 100 Humanist, rationalist, irreligious, atheistic, Bright, secular, Ethical Culture, and freethought organizations in more than 40 countries. The "Happy Human" is the official symbol of the IHEU as well as being regarded as a universally recognised symbol for secular humanism."

Also from wiki, the very first line on the subject in fact (on humanism.....not secular humanism...like I said, you're mixing the dirty words).

"Humanism is a group of philosophies and ethical perspectives which emphasize the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers individual thought and evidence (rationalism, empiricism), over established doctrine or faith (fideism)."

I see very little to take issue with in the broadest sense, personally. Is it more the secular bit (an adjective - added to demonstrate the nuance and difference between humanism and secular humanism) that bothers you? If it weren't secular, but just humanism, would that sort out the problem?

[Darkstar]

Darkstar, are you aware of the use of irony to communicate contradictions?

Yeah, I'm just usually oblivious to it. And sarcasm, I really need my sarcasm detector fixed. It's even more defective online than in person (though I can often coax it to work in person, it is useless here). Oh, and I don't know much slang either (though I know more than I used to).

---

If you want evidence, look at your paycheck. See the parts of it which the government takes out. Someone takes the and moves it somewhere else.

I'm in college. I have no job. Not that you would necessarily know...

What does the education system look like, is it to indoctrinate in the ideology of the state or is it for other ends?

Ideology of the state? And here I thought we had a multiparty system...did I miss the liberal fascist takeover?