Is Hell or Prison the best cure for immorality?

[tor]

I am against idea of hell of any kind.

You really are missing out on the bigger picture. As a pessimist I do not see how any religious individual cannot believe in hell but now that I recall you are an anti-atheist and lack morals and the ability to know what is real.

Woah. That's a lot of assertions about me you got there. I think I have better ability to know what is real than you do.
As for morals where do your morals come from?

[Rabb Allah]

Woah. That's a lot of assertions about me you got there. I think I have better ability to know what is real than you do.
As for morals where do your morals come from?

My morality comes from the ability to determine the consequences of my actions and the effects they have upon others. You are an anti-theist on the other hand and oppose a perceived reality thus denying the notion that there can be a reality besides your own. This then goes back to your morality which means you are aggressive and lack the virtues of kindness, love and tolerance. Since you are incapable of living with other people who do not subscribe to your views you become a nuisance and live to make other people's lives miserable making you an agent of suffering and thus immoral. This also goes back to your perception of reality as you deny the existence of others minds and their autonomy and you perceive yourself as a god because only you know what is best for another mind. You inflict yourself upon other minds as a tumor and try to create duplicates of your own mind through the influence of thoughts, ideas and perceptions. There is a word for this and it is called fitna(chaos). You are essentially the devil and much like the devil you cannot cope with reality and the fact you are unable to have your own reality with your own ideals being presents exclusively.

You behave much like an Iblis and in reality you are one. Hell is a very fit abode for you and in reality hell is where you will stay. But poor little old me cannot tell because I am delusional and do not live in your reality.

[tor]

Woah. Ok let's go step by step.

My morality comes from the ability to determine the consequences of my actions and the effects they have upon others.

Great so do I.

You are an anti-theist on the other hand and oppose a perceived reality thus denying the notion that there can be a reality besides your own.

I never said that there can be a reality besides my own.

This then goes back to your morality which means you are aggressive and lack the virtues of kindness, love and tolerance.

I indeed do have these qualities and there are people who can confirm it.

Since you are incapable of living with other people who do not subscribe to your views

Actually I am doing it right now.

you become a nuisance and live to make other people's lives miserable making you an agent of suffering and thus immoral.

If my anti-theism causes other people suffering they can't blame me for it

This also goes back to your perception of reality as you deny the existence of others minds

I don't deny existence of other minds.

and their autonomy and you perceive yourself as a god because only you know what is best for another mind.

I do not percieve myself as a god nor did I ever say that. I do not always know what is best for another mind but I try to find out

You inflict yourself upon other minds as a tumor and try to create duplicates of your own mind through the influence of thoughts, ideas and perceptions.

If you can say so about me you must say so about everyone else

There is a word for this and it is called fitna(chaos). You are essentially the devil and much like the devil

Nice so I am the devil now.

you cannot cope with reality and the fact you are unable to have your own reality with your own ideals being presents exclusively.

You are saying I cannot do something I am doing right this second.

You behave much like an Iblis and in reality you are one. Hell is a very fit abode for you and in reality hell is where you will stay.

So you want me to go to hell. Thank you very much kind sir

But poor little old me cannot tell because I am delusional and do not live in your reality.

Actually you and I both live in same reality. It's not my reality but I live in it and so do you

[Esquilax]

Why are you so concerned with religious texts? Also have you really not read any of the Hindu scriptures because that sort of hell is mentioned in the Vedas.

I'm not overly concerned with them, it was a singular point I made at the start of my post to illustrate what I found to be unjust about most mainstream conceptions of hell. The fact that I had to reiterate that for you doesn't mean that they're at all my focus.

A feudal warlord conquers, please tell me in a hypothetical sense what a god would have to conquer. I understand you are not so bright in the matters of theology yet alone common sense but if someone creates something it is thus their property.

I'm not so bright, and yet you're the one who missed my point in favor of the most literal interpretation you could find.

My point wasn't about conquering, but about strength, about this "might makes right" attitude that seems to be at the heart of this idea that god has the right to do whatever he wants. Aside from being powerful, what exactly has god done to earn these rights you say he has over us. And don't say "created us," because we fucking take children away from unfit parents, having a hand in the origins of something doesn't confer you automatic dominion over it. Even if it did, we'd just have another unjust power system on the list.

The issue though is that you view consciousness and supposed autonomy as a negation towards ownership. We are the ones who created such concepts to save our society from wide spread infanticide since a child is a biological product of another body ruled by a mind. God has no higher authority and has no morals since morality is merely a biological product and intellectually retweeked tool to prevent us from cutting throats. None of these things are applicable when you are speaking about a nonbiological being that is not even capable of being quantified or understood.

More "mysterious ways" crap? Spare me; if you can't even detail why god somehow has rights above and beyond us other than to say that he's magical, then you can just go right ahead and admit that you don't have an argument, already.

So God is George Bush?

What the fuck are you talking about?

[Rabb Allah]

Why are you so concerned with religious texts? Also have you really not read any of the Hindu scriptures because that sort of hell is mentioned in the Vedas.

I'm not overly concerned with them, it was a singular point I made at the start of my post to illustrate what I found to be unjust about most mainstream conceptions of hell. The fact that I had to reiterate that for you doesn't mean that they're at all my focus.

A feudal warlord conquers, please tell me in a hypothetical sense what a god would have to conquer. I understand you are not so bright in the matters of theology yet alone common sense but if someone creates something it is thus their property.

I'm not so bright, and yet you're the one who missed my point in favor of the most literal interpretation you could find.

My point wasn't about conquering, but about strength, about this "might makes right" attitude that seems to be at the heart of this idea that god has the right to do whatever he wants. Aside from being powerful, what exactly has god done to earn these rights you say he has over us. And don't say "created us," because we fucking take children away from unfit parents, having a hand in the origins of something doesn't confer you automatic dominion over it. Even if it did, we'd just have another unjust power system on the list.

The issue though is that you view consciousness and supposed autonomy as a negation towards ownership. We are the ones who created such concepts to save our society from wide spread infanticide since a child is a biological product of another body ruled by a mind. God has no higher authority and has no morals since morality is merely a biological product and intellectually retweeked tool to prevent us from cutting throats. None of these things are applicable when you are speaking about a nonbiological being that is not even capable of being quantified or understood.

More "mysterious ways" crap? Spare me; if you can't even detail why god somehow has rights above and beyond us other than to say that he's magical, then you can just go right ahead and admit that you don't have an argument, already.

So God is George Bush?

What the fuck are you talking about?

You are talking about God as if he lived in a society and was elected as president. You are dramatically downplaying even the most common perceptions about god. You are tossing out every single quality and action to replace god with some sort of Olympian ruler ship like Zeus.

Must we really start on the ignostic level before we progress? If you do not even accept the most basics of my position towards god then you are not arguing against my claim. You are just making strawman arguments.

[Esquilax]

You are talking about God as if he lived in a society and was elected as president. You are dramatically downplaying even the most common perceptions about god. You are tossing out every single quality and action to replace god with some sort of Olympian ruler ship like Zeus.

Yes, I'm holding god to exactly the same moral standard I would hold a human being to, and you're trying to get me to hold him to a lesser standard, because that's the only one you can use and still find god to be morally sufficient in any area.

Must we really start on the ignostic level before we progress? If you do not even accept the most basics of my position towards god then you are not arguing against my claim. You are just making strawman arguments.

If I accepted your claim, where would our point of disagreement be? That's what I'm saying, I don't accept outright, based on nothing but your assertion, that god has earned the right to be sovereign over us. Your next move should be to demonstrate your initial claim, not just insult my intelligence. That's not an argument.

[Rabb Allah]

Yes, I'm holding god to exactly the same moral standard I would hold a human being to, and you're trying to get me to hold him to a lesser standard, because that's the only one you can use and still find god to be morally sufficient in any area.

I apologize for saying you are not bright but usually when an atheist argues about god in comparison to a human it is a strawman argument and intellectually dishonest. Back to the topic.....

I am going to start from ignosticism because you assertions are presupposing far too much. It is very anthropocentric which is worse than being a geocentrist.

If you created a costume computer, highly complex and is automated do you have the right to destroy it unconditionally?

If I accepted your claim, where would our point of disagreement be? That's what I'm saying, I don't accept outright, based on nothing but your assertion, that god has earned the right to be sovereign over us. Your next move should be to demonstrate your initial claim, not just insult my intelligence. That's not an argument.

We shall see to this. Sorry about mild attack. ......supposedly cats make things better, I myself hate cats.

[xr34p3rx]

Well, statistics for the American prison population, show well over 60% of incarcerated people classify themselves as "Christian." This should tell us that "fearing punishment" doesn't make a difference, whether it is secular or religious. People only change bad behaviors for good, if they want to change.

Fear tactics don't create sustainable change in humans.

but they werent "real christians"

[Esquilax]

I apologize for saying you are not bright but usually when an atheist argues about god in comparison to a human it is a strawman argument and intellectually dishonest. Back to the topic.....

I can only argue from my own experience; I'm not a mind reader so if you've got a disagreement over what I say it's probably due to you having some information or idea that I haven't come across yet. I won't lie here because... why would I? I don't exactly have a lot invested in this thread.

If you created a costume computer, highly complex and is automated do you have the right to destroy it unconditionally?

That depends: if it's just mechanisms then yes, I'd say so. However, if this computer is self aware and conscious, then there's a moral dimension present that there wouldn't be for a purely material thing. If the computer is self aware, even if I made it, then the same considerations would apply to it as it would to every other living being. I don't have the right to harm my children, and I don't have the right to senselessly harm or kill any other living being past a certain level of cognizance.

[Bob Kelso]

The biblical hell is just, a just God created it and will justly put those there that refuse His Son.

No prison can be called just because it's a place where justice is to be carried out and innocent people are sent to prison. Though the system we have in the U.S. is not perfect it is quite good.

GC

The biblical hell is far from being just, infinite punishment for finite crime is not the act of a just god Godschild. You only think your god is just because you like the thought of it, your god can't even abide by his own rules.