"How Can I Be Happy?" - Humanism Refuted

[LostLocke]

No, I'm just exposing atheist logic.

Which to you means, and correct me if I'm wrong,....
"Rape is wrong because God told me so. If he changed his mind today I would be out raping because it would no longer be wrong."
Correct?

[dimaniac]

No, I'm just exposing atheist logic.

Which to you means, and correct me if I'm wrong,....
"Rape is wrong because God told me so. If he changed his mind today I would be out raping because it would no longer be wrong."
Correct?

I'm an antinatalist so passing on genes means nothing to me but if it was the meaning of my life then rape would be logical.

[FatAndFaithless]

But nobody here has claimed that it is the meaning of life, so stop treating it like we have by calling it "Atheist logic".

[Napoléon]

I'm an antinatalist so passing on genes means nothing to me but if it was the meaning of my life then rape would be logical.

[dimaniac]

But nobody here has claimed that it is the meaning of life

lol

[FatAndFaithless]

Besides you, of course.

[Esquilax]

[Mudhammam]

Objective right and wrong can be reached, even if morality is subjective. Yes the bible does have clear views of what it deems right and wrong. You are allowed to own people. You are allowed to commit mass murder of non christians. Jesus commands you to love your neighbor as yourself, but also hate yourself. Above anything else you are commanded to love god, and good or bad actions take a back seat to that.

And notably, which these "objective morality" fuckers never seem to get, when they're slinging mud at everyone else, is that those commands are exactly as subjective as what they're denigrating, because god is a subject too. Where did these supposed "objective morals" come from? Oh, god's mind? Would that be the same place that it's wrong for morals to come from when a humanist does it?

At least the humanists fucking think about their moral decisions before they make them. Truthfully the theist starts out on the same level as the atheist, and then purposely lowers themselves by refusing to think through their morality first.

I have a difficult time making sense of "objective morality" for the very reason you point out, Esq. Chad, your first sentence appears to include mutually exclusive affirmations. Judgments regarding right and wrong are evaluative interpretations that subjects read into physical facts, so the requirement for objectivity in morality is that these evaluations supervene the facts independently of any subject's interpretation of them...which seems to me to be a wooden-iron, a contradictio in adjecto. Only to the extent that human beings agree on their fundamental needs and desires is a particular moral framework possible.

[Jackalope]

None of this gets you to moral justification.

I'm talking about logical justification. Moral is subjective

Doesn't get you there, either.

[LostLocke]

I'm an antinatalist so passing on genes means nothing to me but if it was the meaning of my life then rape would be logical.

That still doesn't really say anything.
So, to ask you directly....

If God said rape was no longer wrong, would you become a rapist?
Yes or no?