Why be good?

[IATIA]

Quite a number of their priests have some serious being disgusted disgusting potential also.

(my bold)

Fixed that for you.  

[rexbeccarox]

Also, are you going to answer my question?

Not until I finish reading the materials I want to get through. 

Oh, but you've got enough time to post that you won't be getting back to me because you're reading "materials".  



It's really nice of you to prove all of my points for me, Randy.  Seriously: thank you.

[Jackalope]

Randy, you equivocate as if the strength of the two claims are equal.  They are not.

One is a mundane claim, the other is not.  Nonetheless, I would not expect you to accept that claim on the basis of my word alone.

However, if you cared as much about truth as you apparently do about scoring cheap rhetorical points, you could:

* Speak to people who were there, all of which (to my knowledge) are still alive.
* Speak to the attending physician.
* Speak to the E.R. physician who intubated me.
* Speak to the anesthesiologist who put me into an induced coma.
* Speak to the multitude of nurses and technicians who cared for me.

Yep, all of that's just testimony, but it's first person testimony.  But wait, there's more!

* You could examine the medical records
* You could examine the insurance records
* ...and the billing records
* ...and the canceled checks that paid for the service.

All of this would tell a coherent and mundane story, all within the realm of ordinary human experience, backed by documentation written by people who were actually there, who's identities are known, and who may be questioned about it.

In any case, the cheap rhetorical point you're so desperately trying to make is wholly irrelevant in my case, because I'm completely uninterested in yours, or anyone else's analysis as to the veracity of the gospels, because, quite frankly, I don't give a flying fuck whether they're true or not.  I *do* care about demonstrating that your singular assertion that atheists, when close to deal, will certainly "make it right" with your God, your backpedaling from that claim notwithstanding.

You can backpedal all you like, you can misrepresent people's views all you like, but that just makes you an intellectually dishonest asshole in my view.

[Jackalope]

I see Randy's trying to change the subject.

So I'm not the only one noticing that he constantly moved the goalposts.

Not at all.  It's pretty damned obvious he's here to serve his own agenda, and nothing more.  He's apparently not interested in listening or comprehending where we're actually coming from and the positions we actually hold.

[Rhondazvous]

1. Statistically, people who believein god and hell have contributed their fair share of evil to this world. People who feel inclined to do evil will do it whether they believe in god or not. Christians who want to sin will use god's grace as an excuse. "Oh Lord, forgive me for this lie I'm getting ready to tell."
2. Atheists do good because they know they have to live on this planet and good behavior makes life better for everyone. No they don't HAVE TO, But as seen in #1, neither do Christians.
3. Needing god to exist so we'd have a reason to do good does not mean that he does exist. Necessity may be the father of invention (such as inventing a god who meets our needs) butit's not the father of reality or even a close relative. At least the atheists' reason for doing good is based on reality, so it is a stronger reason than a mythical hell that we can pray our way out of.

[Randy Carson]

Not until I finish reading the materials I want to get through. 

Oh, but you've got enough time to post that you won't be getting back to me because you're reading "materials".  



It's really nice of you to prove all of my points for me, Randy.  Seriously: thank you.

As I said in the other thread, I read serious stuff at night...when the house is quiet and I won't be interrupted.

I asked a question in the OP, and several folks in the forum gave me things to think about. That might take awhile.


In the meantime, there are plenty of different conflicting opinions put forth by atheists in this thread about why people should be good, so you'll have lots of things to discuss without me.

[abaris]

As I said in the other thread, I read serious stuff at night...when the house is quiet and I won't be interrupted.

Just how stupid do you think we are?

Also, are you going to answer my question?

Not until I finish reading the materials I want to get through. 

Posted roughly an hour ago. And in the other thread you said, you already did the reading.

[Ravenshire]

What I illustrated, however, is that when people tell us what they experience or see, in the absence of evidence to the contrary (about their character, etc), we can normally believe what they have reported.

I'm calling bullshit here. Unless you're willing to admit that you believe in all gods ever invented by man, bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, alien abductions, crop circles, and all the Illuminati conspiracies, your claim that we should believe unless there is contrary evidence is just the word salad you serve as a side to your preaching.

[Ravenshire]

As I said in the other thread, I read serious stuff at night...when the house is quiet and I won't be interrupted.

Just how stupid do you think we are?

Well, he does think he can convince us he can read...

[Crossless2.0]

@Randy:  Why would you expect a group of people whose only commonality is that they don't believe in a god to be in lockstep on the question 'why be good'?  Rejecting divine command 'theory' doesn't obligate us to agree completely on the basis of moral action.  Perhaps we aren't as enamored of the flock/herd metaphor as you believers are.