What is the Highest Authority You Recognize?

[RoadRunner79]

Prooftexting and inventing a strawman does not equal bupkiss!
And I don't care how long you've been playing candyland, what you are doing is not debate or discussion.  Just re-enforcing the your delusions, with the voice's in your head.

If you want to discuss, I'm happy to - but you need to listen and respond to what is said.

Sorry, my refusing to walk down your Yellow Brick Road and cutting to the core of the arguments I get from every religion does make it a "straw man". 

You don't want to "discuss" you want to sell, you simply try to convince yourself that a "discussion" is all you are doing. 

Yea and again, we also have Muslims here on this site that also claim they are only "discussing" or "debating" take your pick. How many people of other religions do you "discuss" with, or do you mainly "discuss" with atheists?

You have  product you are selling, stop lying to me trying to pretend that is not what you are doing.

You call it a "discussion" with us here, but I bet you peddle your product in not only other threads but in your own real personal life too.

EVERY RELIGION IN THE WORLD argues like this.

1. I got it right.
2. My religious history is long.
3. My religion is popular.
4. My holy writing says.
5. My holy person says.
6. My club has a history of discoveries.
7. My religion matches science.

Now please tell me what I have left out that you have not argued because  you do think you got it right otherwise you would not be here even "discussing" you would be seeking answers elsewhere.

I bet you don't have "discussions" with many Hindus or Buddhists or Jews or Muslims do you?

How about you discuss your "position" with a variety of religions for a few years first before you stupidly assume I don't know what you are doing.

I would suggest you start a thread of your own, if you want to discuss the logic of your assertions here. Rather than spamming and trolling every other thread, with non-sense.

[Brian37]

What is your point, because you don't like that we would agree that it is wrong to torture babies, we do agree that it is wrong to torture babies.

But it isn't wrong just because everyone has the same subjective opinion, is it? It's wrongness is an absolute moral fact. Thus, if there is one moral fact then morality is not entirely subjective.

Other mammals protect their young too. See you are so stuck on the bullshit idea that morality is handed down to humans from above. But guess what male lions and Zebras do? They murder the young of rivals and even ones born from their own females that another rival made by sneaking in sex behind the dominate male's back.

And in antiquity in both polytheism and monotheism the rival tribes when they defeated another, would either take the kids as slaves, use the girls to reproduce and what they didn't want they murdered. That is why the Egyptian myth of God killing off the first born exists. Not because it is a true story, but that is what humans did back then. It is also why the flood myth has all the families besides the Noah Family dying. 

And even today, while most humans DONT hurt their young or the young of others, more conservative families in the world in multiple religions do still consider it their right to abuse their children by beating them. It wasn't really considered a public issue when a kid was abused until the 1970s in America. Back when I was growing up if you saw a parent beating their kid it was considered a family matter.  And why? Because that is centuries of humans having a mostly authoritarian view, just like polytheism and monotheism of antiquity.

We don't value violence to children now because the pediatric and psychiatric community know far better now how kids behave and respond to life. 

I am sure you glossed over the verses in your book that has God telling his followers to keep the defeated's children as a bounty and the girls as prizes in war. I am sure you read that part didn't you?

[Mister Agenda]

I agree, morality is subjective, and there are some basics that are universal absolutely,... 

Am I the only one who sees the inconsistency here? Is there any atheist on this thread willing to challenge the muddled thinking in "one of their own."?

Few of us always phrase well, and I'm far from perfect in that department, but I think most of us can understand each other without picking apart every jot and tittle...I've been known to split hairs and mix metaphors myself sometimes. It's hard enough to keep up with deliberate obfuscation and attempts at sleight of mind. Some muddled writing barely rates as long as I can understand the drift and I don't feel the person is using it to try to manipulate or deceive me.

[Brian37]

Sorry, my refusing to walk down your Yellow Brick Road and cutting to the core of the arguments I get from every religion does make it a "straw man". 

You don't want to "discuss" you want to sell, you simply try to convince yourself that a "discussion" is all you are doing. 

Yea and again, we also have Muslims here on this site that also claim they are only "discussing" or "debating" take your pick. How many people of other religions do you "discuss" with, or do you mainly "discuss" with atheists?

You have  product you are selling, stop lying to me trying to pretend that is not what you are doing.

You call it a "discussion" with us here, but I bet you peddle your product in not only other threads but in your own real personal life too.

EVERY RELIGION IN THE WORLD argues like this.

1. I got it right.
2. My religious history is long.
3. My religion is popular.
4. My holy writing says.
5. My holy person says.
6. My club has a history of discoveries.
7. My religion matches science.

Now please tell me what I have left out that you have not argued because  you do think you got it right otherwise you would not be here even "discussing" you would be seeking answers elsewhere.

I bet you don't have "discussions" with many Hindus or Buddhists or Jews or Muslims do you?

How about you discuss your "position" with a variety of religions for a few years first before you stupidly assume I don't know what you are doing.

I would suggest you start a thread of your own, if you want to discuss the logic of your assertions here.  Rather than spamming and trolling every other thread, with non-sense.

You not liking my repetition does not constitute spam. Nor is it trolling. You simply don't like the fact I keep pointing out the short answer. No matter how elaborate you make your arguments it still boils down to you having nothing and being in the same boat as every other religion.

How about you simply admit you like what you believe. That would be an honest answer. 

If you got it right the world should be beating a path to your door, but funny that, not all 7 billion humans think you got it right.

[Amarok]

As usual wooter smug  apologist  antics bite him in the ass

A evolved human inclination to value our offspring does not prove morality is objective .It proves that humans have a subjective inclination towards there offspring. (which can be overwritten by circumstance) .And in no way relates to a magic sky wizard or his baseless dictations nor" his nature".

As for the tired baby torture scenario (how original by the way ) .You me and the some total of humanity agreed that it was wrong (which is not true just read the book IT). Then this demonstrates a human norm not a universal fact.For all we know a alien race on some planet may consider baby torture is not only accepted but a virtue. Hell sci-fi can give us examples of this (paging the Dark Elder)

And no there is no conflict in saying I can conceive of no scenario were I could consider baby torture okay. And admitting this idea is not woven into the fabric of existence .

I often wonder what smug apologist (who have no basis on lecturing me on morality) would do in the above quote bible passages  at them and engage the perpetrator in a theological debate   

So wooter and the rest of the sheep can bleat all day about transient magic authorities it is without basis because wooter is the only one here showing "muddled thinking "

[RoadRunner79]

I would suggest you start a thread of your own, if you want to discuss the logic of your assertions here.  Rather than spamming and trolling every other thread, with non-sense.

You not liking my repetition does not constitute spam. Nor is it trolling. You simply don't like the fact I keep pointing out the short answer. No matter how elaborate you make your arguments it still boils down to you having nothing and being in the same boat as every other religion.

How about you simply admit you like what you believe. That would be an honest answer. 

If you got it right the world should be beating a path to your door, but funny that, not all 7 billion humans think you got it right.

So...is that a no on examining your claims....I'm shocked. And I suppose that you have 7 billion humans beating a path to your door? Your logic is flawed.... and I'm getting the notion that you don't care.....you'll just make up a story and declare victory! Congrats... I'm not buying what you are sellling.

[Astreja]

Authority is contextual. I defer to my clarinet teacher for improving technique, to my supervisor at my day job regarding work-related procedures, to the speed limit signs on the road when deciding how fast to drive, and to whoever is holding the conductor's baton when playing in a band. If there's no one or nothing obviously in charge of a situation, I use common sense, conscience and as many facts as I can acquire.

I worship none of them, nor can I think of any reason that I should worship them.

[Whateverist]

Varies by venue.

[dyresand]

um....

---

captain picard

---

[downbeatplumb]

What is the highest authority you recognize? In other words, to what or to whom do you feel obliged to obey and why?

In what setting?

At work I obey my line manager and ultimately the head of the service.

In general I just tend to please myself.

I do listen to the wife or "she who must be obeyed"

---

"Subjective" and "absolute" don't really play well together.

Thank you. It's like saying, "it is always wrong to torture babies for fun - but that's just my opinion."

It is a widely held opinion. But some people do do that or worse.
Google emperor Tiberious he was supposed to do some strange stuff with babies.

What is bad IS a matter of opinion and opinions change over time.
People do now work on Sundays ,wear mixed cloth and have tattoos all those were "bad".
People used to look down on other people because of their sexuality but to do that is now considered "bad" and that this change in attitude makes for a better more inclusive world.

The world improves as people move away from faith and its strange arbitrary rules.