Atheists are Better than You...

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
I like how some of the social positions are held out as basic moral principles.[/quote]

Other than the death penalty and possibly corporal punishment for children, I don’t see anything that isn’t a pretty Manichean right-and-wrong issue.

Basic morality: torture is bad, racism is bad, sexism is bad, homophobia is bad, Antisemitism is bad, environmental degradation is bad, human rights are good. That doesn’t seem too controversial.[/quote]

Take homophobia, for example. What the hell does that mean? I don’t want gay studies taught in the public school system. Also, I don’t support government recognition of gay marriage. Do I want them dragged out of their homes, or beaten up by hoodlums? No. Even so, am I still a homophobe because of the earlier beliefs I put foward? If so, is that even ‘bad?’ By what authority is this sociologist declaring it ‘bad?’

Am I racist because I dislike affirmative action, am willing to confront uncomfortable facts, and want the government to do something about illegal immigration? If I am racist, how does he decide it’s ‘bad?’
[/quote]

What makes a person a homophobe is dislike of homosexuality or homosexuals. A racist dislikes a certain race of people. It isn’t complicated.[/quote]

So as a firm believer in the immorality of homosexuality who has good friends who are homosexuals…what does that make me?
[/quote]

Obviously makes you a in-the-closet homophobicphobe homophobe homosexual…or something.

[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:

IMO, homosexuality is wrong, but its a wrong that the person will answer to God for, not me, so far as I am concerned I wont treat my gay friend any differently than my straight friend.

[/quote]

I’d say you are definitely not then. And I’d commend you for holding that belief.

It is tough when religion is part of the equation. If you devout, and your religion holds that homosexuality is immoral, then homophobia can to some degree be justified.

I take issue with the fundamental religious tenet, but I understand how it can lead people to call homosexuality wrong.

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.[/quote]

What is undue harm?

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.[/quote]

What is undue harm?[/quote]

We can analyze the meaning of each term in each of my posts, but it will get us nowhere. That is my belief and I’m sure you understand it very well.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.[/quote]

What is undue harm?[/quote]

We can analyze the meaning of each term in each of my posts, but it will get us nowhere. That is my belief and I’m sure you understand it very well.[/quote]

No, that is why I was asking questions but I’ll stop and just do homework.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.[/quote]

What is undue harm?[/quote]

We can analyze the meaning of each term in each of my posts, but it will get us nowhere. That is my belief and I’m sure you understand it very well.[/quote]

No, that is why I was asking questions but I’ll stop and just do homework.[/quote]
lol OK. Undue harm is harm that is undue.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:
OK, redact the word homosexuality from my original definition. The only real evil in the matter is discrimination against people.[/quote]

Can we discriminate against people that are evil? Or is that evil, too?[/quote]

I don’t really have the desire to defend my belief that homophobia is immoral down to its every philosophical component. If you think it is OK, then that is you. I don’t.

With regard to people that are evil: it’s my belief that each man on earth must be afforded the freedom to be happy so long as in the pursuit of that happiness he does not cause undue harm to others.

The evil cause harm to others and therefore forfeit that right to happiness.[/quote]

What is undue harm?[/quote]

We can analyze the meaning of each term in each of my posts, but it will get us nowhere. That is my belief and I’m sure you understand it very well.[/quote]

No, that is why I was asking questions but I’ll stop and just do homework.[/quote]
lol OK. Undue harm is harm that is undue.[/quote]

How would we define undue?

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

How would we define undue?[/quote]

Harm done to others other than that which is necessary for the defense of one’s own person or family. I think all morality flows from each individual’s desire to live freely and happily. In order to fully protect the maximum amount of freedom and happiness available to us, we must submit to ethical codes which disallow impingement upon others’ freedom and happiness, so as to ensure that impingement upon our own is disallowed.

They have bigger dicks and nicer cars too :slight_smile:

[quote]pat wrote:
They have bigger dicks and nicer cars too :)[/quote]

This part I have bolded is indisputably wrong.

Sounds like the MSM is finding more way to divide us and make us argue. Give religious nutbags even more reasons to hate atheists…great.

Religion and Politics, the only thing worth arguing about.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Religion and Politics, the only thing worth arguing about.[/quote]That’s pretty good Chris LOL! Nice av BTW. Mikey’s Moses rocks.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Religion and Politics, the only thing worth arguing about.[/quote]That’s pretty good Chris LOL! Nice av BTW. Mikey’s Moses rocks.
[/quote]

Yeah, it’s a butchered version of G.K. Chesterton quote. And, thanks on the av, I have been reading Freud’s analysis of it.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< I have been reading Freud’s analysis of it.[/quote]LOL!!LOL!!! Man I wish we lived near each other Chris. Despite everything I really think we’d be buddies. I am absolutely NOT in any way poking fun at you. You are a blast my dear friend!!! Only you would think of something like that. Michelangelo’s command of the stone is truly breathtaking. Really. There aren’t words.

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
They have bigger dicks and nicer cars too :)[/quote]

This part I have bolded is indisputably wrong.[/quote]

cool, what do you drive?

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
They have bigger dicks and nicer cars too :)[/quote]

This part I have bolded is indisputably wrong.[/quote]

cool, what do you drive?[/quote]

A '96 Dyna. Not very cool.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]GCF wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

LOL

I know more believers than non-believers and I can’t say there is any difference as far as being a good person.
My dad is a believer and was totally accepting of me not being.
Maybe I just hang out with better believers, also I’m not American, so I guess those studies don’t apply to me.
[/quote]

That may be true but I know who I would rather have as my phone a friend on who wants to be a millionaire. [/quote]

I sometimes think that not all who claim to be believers really are, like politicians and people who only attend church during special occasions. As an atheist I have difficulty believing believers really believe. If that makes sense. lol
[/quote]

I know what you’re saying, but no. I think most are believers, but I think they just don’t follow it.[/quote]

LOL
So basically you think most are believers (even atheists) and I think most are atheist (even believers)?
[/quote]

No, I think that there might be some believers who say they are atheist (not sure why), but I think most atheists are genuine. What I am saying is that most believers are actual believers they just don’t take their own medicine.
[/quote]

I thought maybe you were referring to that “no atheists in a foxhole” expression, or however it goes.[/quote]

Actually I do know about 15 atheist that lived in ‘foxholes’ for 8 years, now. I think there is a good reason for the saying though, it does seem that when people learn their fate, they look for something bigger than them to appeal to. It is natural, that does mean that there isn’t any, though.

[quote]
I was not raised in a religion so my exposure was limited, friends, summer camps, etc. I wonder if I was raised in a religion if I would still be an atheist.[/quote]

Never know, I wasn’t raised religious, either. I am sure if you were raised that way and unless someone gave you unsurmountable proof you’d leave (but then again I have unsurmountable proof that atheists are wrong ;)) that you’d probably be theist because you do seem like a smart lady.

I personally didn’t grow up religiously, at all. We prayed before meals…that was it. No church, nothing. I sure didn’t have an experience of G-d (at least not physically, unless you count when I had the cognitive reaction of knowing someone was lying to me). I sat down with a blank slate (it was so bad at one point I honestly couldn’t answer if 2+2=4), and figured things out from the ground up. Started with the question “Is G-d Real?”

I am sure you can figure out what happened after about four months of going through the logical arguments. (I’ll put the reasons at the end)

Maybe I should read everything before answering. Yes, I would be a believer if I was not raised with religion, because I was not raised with religion.

Four Reasons why G-d is Real…that I can explain in a weekend (because I have a lot more, just not that much time).

  1. The Universe began to exist.
  2. The Universe is finely tuned.
  3. Objective Morality exists.
  4. Jesus of Nazareth. [/quote]

My dad would pray before meals too. My real experience, on my own, was at 11. The rule at my friends house was if you wanted to sleep over on Saturday you had to go to church with them on Sunday. I can’t remember the church (not catholic) but basically I learned that you were supposed to just feel god’s love and some crazy stories about christians being killed for their beliefs and a true christian would not lie even if it meant death. There’s more to it but that summer was a very negative experience.

I feel that when I finally learned what atheism was it was a relief.

As I don’t really understand the Big Bang(something from nothing) or DNA etc (I have some reading to do this summer) I can’t say I have proof of no intervention but I also don’t have proof of intervention.

Although as far as the universe being finally tuned(for us?), I would be more convinced if we were living on a planet that should not be able to support life.
The dice example: If the die is rolled and you get a 6 that doesn’t mean intervention (or a lack of intervention either) it just means a 6 was available(chance). You would have to prove that the universe and earth are the equivalent of rolling a 7, this would indicate intervention. I’m not sure how you would do this though.