What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Iroscato]

This has gone on long enough.

When you make something, say a fine painting do you allow other people to tell you what it is supposed to represent? Or do you name it and tell them what motivated you to create it?

This world is the creation of another, higher being. It does not matter what you think about it, these are the rules that have been laid out and can rest happily in the knowledge that the creator who is all good sees the full picture and formation we do not.

You do not get to question him, what he has decided goes. If you don't like it then well, tough.

No darling, reality has this funny way of not working that way. You are adorable though, you keep chug-chugging along like a good little soldier. You are becoming most amusing

[Longhorn]

DO ATHEISTS CONDONE RAPE?

"If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion."

Atheist Sam Harris, Interview at The Sun: The Temple of Reason

I'm sorry, I didn't know my name was Sam Harris.

I'll make sure to extend every statement every christian makes to you too from now on, Randy.

[Longhorn]

This has gone on long enough.

When you make something, say a fine painting do you allow other people to tell you what it is supposed to represent? Or do you name it and tell them what motivated you to create it?

This world is the creation of another, higher being. It does not matter what you think about it, these are the rules that have been laid out and can rest happily in the knowledge that the creator who is all good sees the full picture and formation we do not.

You do not get to question him, what he has decided goes. If you don't like it then well, tough.

No darling, reality has this funny way of not working that way. You are adorable though, you keep chug-chugging along like a good little soldier. You are becoming most amusing

It's a poe monster, Iro. Don't feed his giggles

[Tonus]

This world is the creation of another, higher being. It does not matter what you think about it, these are the rules that have been laid out and can rest happily in the knowledge that the creator who is all good sees the full picture and formation we do not.

You do not get to question him, what he has decided goes. If you don't like it then well, tough.

And again I must point out that such a being should terrify you. You live at the whim of an angry and vengeful creature who can do as he pleases to whom he pleases. You cannot hide from him. You cannot even shield your thoughts from him. He is unstoppable. And he is capable of mass slaughter and painful torment and cruelty regardless of how good you think you are, or how devout you think you are. And if he decides that it's time to make you suffer the worst misery you've ever experienced, you have no choice but to suffer it and be thankful that he didn't get any other ideas while he was working you over.

And you want to spend an eternity within reach of this beast.

[Iroscato]

No darling, reality has this funny way of not working that way. You are adorable though, you keep chug-chugging along like a good little soldier. You are becoming most amusing

It's a poe monster, Iro. Don't feed his giggles

But it's so cyoooot! *Pinches PP's cheek* ^_^

[Tonus]

Also, context:

Saltman: Isn’t religion a natural outgrowth of human nature?

Harris: It almost certainly is. But everything we do is a natural outgrowth of human nature. Genocide is. Rape is. No one would ever think of arguing that this makes genocide or rape a necessary feature of a civilized society. Even if you had a detailed story about the essential purpose religion has served for the past fifty thousand years, even if you could prove that humanity would not have survived without believing in a creator God, that would not mean that it’s a good idea to believe in a creator God now, in a twenty-first-century world that has been shattered into separate moral communities on the basis of religious ideas.

Traditionally, religion has been the receptacle of some good and ennobling features of our psychology. It’s the arena in which people talk about contemplative experience and ethics. And I do think contemplative experience and ethics are absolutely essential to human happiness. I just think we now have to speak about them without endorsing any divisive mythology.

Saltman: Your analogy between organized religion and rape is pretty inflammatory. Is that intentional?

Harris: I can be even more inflammatory than that. If I could wave a magic wand and get rid of either rape or religion, I would not hesitate to get rid of religion. I think more people are dying as a result of our religious myths than as a result of any other ideology. I would not say that all human conflict is born of religion or religious differences, but for the human community to be fractured on the basis of religious doctrines that are fundamentally incompatible, in an age when nuclear weapons are proliferating, is a terrifying scenario. I think we do the world a disservice when we suggest that religions are generally benign and not fundamentally divisive.

Saltman: I’ve interviewed a lot of born-again Christians. Many of them said they were praying for me because they were convinced I’m going to hell, since I’m not a “believer.” Sometimes this irritated me, but I never felt that I was in real danger.

Harris: Even Christian fundamentalists have learned, by and large, to ignore the most barbaric passages in the Bible. They’re not, presumably, eager to see people burned alive for heresy. A few centuries of science, modernity, and secular politics have moderated even the religious extremists among us. But there are a few exceptions to this. There are the Dominionist Christians, for example, who actually do think homosexuals and adulterers should be put to death. But the people going to a megachurch in Orange County, California, are not calling for this.

They are, however, quite sanguine about human suffering. Their opposition to stem-cell research, for instance, is prolonging the misery of tens of millions of people at this moment. Michael Specter wrote an article in the New Yorker titled “Political Science” about how the Christian Right is distorting the government’s relationship to science. One example is that we now have a vaccine for the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus, which causes cervical cancer, of which five thousand women die every year in the United States. The vaccine, which can be given to girls at age eleven or twelve, is safe and effective. Yet evangelical Christians at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — political appointees — have argued that we should not use this vaccine, because it will remove one of the natural deterrents to premarital sex. Reginald Finger, who’s on the immunization advisory committee of the CDC, has said that even if we had a vaccine against HIV, he would have to think long and hard about whether to use it, because it might encourage premarital sex.

Now, these people are not evil. They’re just concerned about the wrong things, because they have imbibed these unjustifiable religious taboos. There is no question, however, that these false concerns add to the world’s misery.

[abaris]

Also, context:

Still a dubious either or.

But don't waste your time on feeding the troll. The main point is that we're not a hive mind. Some may like Harris, some do not, but it's not as if anyone would consider Harris to be on the same level as the bible is for christians. At least I hope not and if some do, I certainly wouldn't want to make their acquaintance.

So, we have a dubious individual quote in bad taste compared to a holy book revealing the divine rules to perform rape.

[Pyrrho]

It is supposed to be a tu quoque argument, which is fallacious, but it even fails at that.  Sam Harris in the quote does not say rape is okay.  The quote indicates that religion is worse than rape, not that rape is okay.

Yeah, I voiced my surprise he's resorting to tu quoque.

But in my case it's a triple failure, since for me Sam Harris is pretty much on the same lines as Randy. His argument is idiotic to use a friendly term, even if he doesn't outright condone rape. And that's the general problem I have when it comes to Harris. He's blurted out many dubious things in his career. I'm certainly not in his fan club and don't attribute him with any authority.

But let's not make this about Harris, since what Randy does, is painting all atheists with the same brush and never accepting that there is no general line of thinking, only individuals. As opposed to his ilk with their dogma and their holy book.

You have identified yet another fallacy with that.  Guilt by association in thinking something applicable to one atheist must be applicable to all of them.  Randy has quite a lot of depth to his errors.

[abaris]

You have identified yet another fallacy with that.  Guilt by association in thinking something applicable to one atheist must be applicable to all of them.  Randy has quite a lot of depth to his errors.

That was and still is the point I'm trying to make. That's why I said above to not feed the troll.

[Tonus]

Quote-mining is a common trait among theists. Yes, it is more likely that they'll do so with the words of a scientist or researcher than they will a writer (like Harris). But it's useful to show the context, to make it easier to judge. Harris is, in the quoted portion, being deliberately inflammatory to make a point.