Why does science always upstage God?

[The Grand Nudger]

Hell yeah it'd be immoral if a plastic surgeon destroyed someone's face without putting them under. Is that in question....?

Is god similarly confused?

[ayost]

Stopping the abuse doesn't come to mind?  Straight to killin the kids?  You sound positively abrahamic.  Something tells me, however, that someone might suffer if you killed all the kids.  Just a lil bit.  kinda.

-but maybe that's just, like, my opinion man?  Can we really know if killing all the kids causes immense suffering?

We've been trying to stop abuse. We can't. Killing foster kids still meets the definition of moral here.

[The Grand Nudger]

I also can't stop the triple homicide that's going to go down at some unknown point and unknown place in future..and yet, that doesn't seem to change the moral nature of a triple homicide?

Still, let's assume the worst, that these people are suffering and there's just no way to stop that without ending them. That is the case for euthenasia, after all. I mean, personally, I'd wait till they grew up and ask them if they were okay with me killing em, first. Just to cross my t's and dot my i's..but then society would prosecute me...because they didn't consent to living in a country that mass murdered kids. Come to think of it..neither do I...because the mass murder of children is blatantly immoral.

Is god similarly confused? Rhetorical, answers in scripture and all that.

[pocaracas]

Stopping the abuse doesn't come to mind?  Straight to killin the kids?  You sound positively abrahamic.  Something tells me, however, that someone might suffer if you killed all the kids.  Just a lil bit.  kinda.

-but maybe that's just, like, my opinion man?  Can we really know if killing all the kids causes immense suffering?

We've been trying to stop abuse. We can't. Killing foster kids still meets the definition of moral here.

And that is why they commit suicide.
Like TGN said, killing does involve increasing the amount of suffering and I don't think anyone can have the authority to ascertain if the suffering due to abuse is greater than the suffering due to being killed. That should be left to the criteria of the person in the particular situation.
And, since you like the parallel, it's like abortion. Leave it to the person who is in the particular situation (and I mean the potential mother).

[The Grand Nudger]

Magic book says abortion is up to the suspicions of a jealous husband. Who are we to argue?

[brewer]

No evidence, just belief, OK by me, time to move along @ayost. You've got nothing even remotely convincing.

Honestly I'm ignoring you, I'm not even reading your posts. Just this one bc it's a single line.

You could ignore me better if you were absent.

Show me concrete evidence for your god, until then it's just....

[The Grand Nudger]

It's a bunch of yapping either way.

Who, upon meeting the bloodgod, would suddenly think "well, fuck me, I was wrong about gods existing. I'm now utterly compelled by godlaw to be an asshole. I've got rocks, who's got babbies!"

Nobody who wouldn't have dashed em on the rocks already, that's who.

[brewer]

It's a bunch of yapping either way.  

Who, upon meeting the bloodgod, would suddenly think "well, fuck me, I was wrong about gods existing.  I'm now utterly compelled by godlaw to be an asshole.  I've got rocks, who's got babbies!"

Nobody who wouldn't have dashed em on the rocks already, that's who.

I'd expect some god magic first, kid killing bears, insane suicidal pigs, pillars of salt, feeding 5000 with a kids meal from Long John Silvers, that kind of thing.

[ayost]

We've been trying to stop abuse. We can't. Killing foster kids still meets the definition of moral here.

And that is why they commit suicide.
Like TGN said, killing does involve increasing the amount of suffering and I don't think anyone can have the authority to ascertain if the suffering due to abuse is greater than the suffering due to being killed. That should be left to the criteria of the person in the particular situation.
And, since you like the parallel, it's like abortion. Leave it to the person who is in the particular situation (and I mean the potential mother).

So an we all see how your morality is completely subjective. There’s so many unknowns and variables and there’s no way to know what provides the most suffering or the least suffering. You’re literally just making it up as you go. This is the opposite of an objective morality. It’s a mish mash of whatever feels right at the time. Which is fine, I just need you to be consistent and commit all the way. In a world where morality is subjective you have no right to complain about anything that anybody does in your worldview. You will complain and you do know right from wrong, but again, I maintain that’s because God has created you in his image and written His law on your heart.

If you want to win the argument just say yes, killing foster kids reduces suffering. At least then you’d be consistent with your own worldview and there’s nothing I could say to it.

---

It's a bunch of yapping either way.

Who, upon meeting the bloodgod, would suddenly think "well, fuck me, I was wrong about gods existing. I'm now utterly compelled by godlaw to be an asshole. I've got rocks, who's got babbies!"

Nobody who wouldn't have dashed em on the rocks already, that's who.

Instead of trying to honestly approach the debate, let’s use childish sarcasm. Because I don’t live in an atheist world I can’t do that. I have to have integrity and treat you with respect.

[arewethereyet]

And that is why they commit suicide.
Like TGN said, killing does involve increasing the amount of suffering and I don't think anyone can have the authority to ascertain if the suffering due to abuse is greater than the suffering due to being killed. That should be left to the criteria of the person in the particular situation.
And, since you like the parallel, it's like abortion. Leave it to the person who is in the particular situation (and I mean the potential mother).

So  an we all see how your morality is completely subjective. There’s so many unknowns and variables and there’s no way to know what provides the most suffering or the least suffering. You’re literally just making it up as you go. This is the opposite of an objective morality. It’s a mish mash of whatever feels right at the time. Which is fine, I just need you to be consistent and commit all the way. In a world where morality is subjective you have no right to complain about anything that anybody does in your worldview. You will complain and you do know right from wrong, but again, I maintain that’s because God has created you in his image and written His law on your heart.

If you want to win the argument just say yes, killing foster kids reduces suffering. At least then you’d be consistent with your own worldview and there’s nothing I could say to it.

---

It's a bunch of yapping either way.  

Who, upon meeting the bloodgod, would suddenly think "well, fuck me, I was wrong about gods existing.  I'm now utterly compelled by godlaw to be an asshole.  I've got rocks, who's got babbies!"

Nobody who wouldn't have dashed em on the rocks already, that's who.

Instead of trying to honestly approach the debate, let’s use childish sarcasm. Because I don’t live in an atheist world I can’t do that. I have to have integrity and treat you with respect.

Yeah, you have really shown a lot of respect to people.

Do you always lie to yourself like that? I really think you believe it.