A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-05-2014, 11:18 PM (This post was last modified: 13-05-2014 09:20 AM by Taqiyya Mockingbird.)
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(12-05-2014 07:14 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(12-05-2014 07:10 PM)pablo628 Wrote:  So you don't believe the book is true, you are more prone to interpreting what it says to fit your ideas?
I'd ask you to enlighten me but I really think I know what it means and, you're getting kinda boring.

Great!

And guess what?

Even if the Bible made no mention of slavery, you would still find fault with it.

You would still find a reason why it is bunk, garbage, trash, ridiculous, fairy tale, insanity, etc. etc.


...because there is so much OTHER bullshit there. It's not JUST the slavery, or JUST the pedophilia, or JUST the incest, or the JUST hypocrisy of moral claims vs. the purported actions of the various characters, or JUST any one given aspect of the tsunami of incoherent bullshit it presents -- it's EVERYTHING -- there is so much FAIL there, no reasonable person who reads it with their eyes open can conclude otherwise.




Quote:You would still think it stupid for saying you were a sinner who is in need of a Saviour.


...because it IS fucking stupid.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-05-2014, 11:47 PM (This post was last modified: 13-05-2014 12:15 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
/thread





Nine million children die every year before they reach the age of five. Picture an Asian tsunami of the sort we saw in 2004 that killed a quarter of a million people. One of those every ten days, killing children only under five. 24,000 children a day, 1,000 an hour, 17 or so a minute. That means that before I can get to the end of this sentence, some few children very likely, will have died in terror and agony.

Think of the parents of these children. Think of the fact that most of these men and women believe in god, and are praying at this moment for their children to be spared; and their prayers will not be answered.

Any god who would allow children by the millions to suffer and die in this way, and their parents to grieve in this way, either can do nothing to help them or doesn't care to. He is therefore either impotent or evil.

We are told that god is loving and kind and just and intrinsically good, but when someone like myself points out the rather obvious compelling evidence that god is cruel and unjust because he visits such suffering on innocent people of a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we're told that god is mysterious; who can understand god's will?

If something good happens to a Christian, he feels some bliss while praying say or he sees some positive change in his life, and we're told that god is good. But when children by the tens of thousands are torn from their parent's arms and drowned, we are told that god is mysterious. I want to suggest to you that it is not only tiresome when otherwise intelligent people speak this way, it is morally reprehensible.

This kind of faith is really the perfection of narcissism. Given all that this god of yours does not accomplish in the lives of others. Given the misery that is being imposed on some helpless child at this instant. This kind of faith is obscene.

To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently, about the suffering of other human beings.

If god is good and loving and just and kind, and he wanted to guide us morally with a book, why give us a book that supports slavery? Why give us a book that admonishes us to kill people for imaginary crimes like witchcraft? But this to me is the true horror of religion.

It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.

-Sam Harris

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like EvolutionKills's post
13-05-2014, 12:13 AM (This post was last modified: 13-05-2014 12:19 AM by Reltzik.)
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
This thread has been....

[Image: wild-buck-new-zealand-ale.jpg]

DEER ALED!

.....

Blush
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Reltzik's post
13-05-2014, 01:05 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
[Image: religion-judgement_day-god-apologise-apo...o0092l.jpg]

Jesus is my Stalker: He has graced me with his unconditional love, but if I reject it and refuse to love him in return, he will make my life Hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like djhall's post
13-05-2014, 08:03 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(12-05-2014 11:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  /thread





Nine million children die every year before they reach the age of five. Picture an Asian tsunami of the sort we saw in 2004 that killed a quarter of a million people. One of those every ten days, killing children only under five. 24,000 children a day, 1,000 an hour, 17 or so a minute. That means that before I can get to the end of this sentence, some few children very likely, will have died in terror and agony.

Think of the parents of these children. Think of the fact that most of these men and women believe in god, and are praying at this moment for their children to be spared; and their prayers will not be answered.

Any god who would allow children by the millions to suffer and die in this way, and their parents to grieve in this way, either can do nothing to help them or doesn't care to. He is therefore either impotent or evil.

We are told that god is loving and kind and just and intrinsically good, but when someone like myself points out the rather obvious compelling evidence that god is cruel and unjust because he visits such suffering on innocent people of a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we're told that god is mysterious; who can understand god's will?

If something good happens to a Christian, he feels some bliss while praying say or he sees some positive change in his life, and we're told that god is good. But when children by the tens of thousands are torn from their parent's arms and drowned, we are told that god is mysterious. I want to suggest to you that it is not only tiresome when otherwise intelligent people speak this way, it is morally reprehensible.

This kind of faith is really the perfection of narcissism. Given all that this god of yours does not accomplish in the lives of others. Given the misery that is being imposed on some helpless child at this instant. This kind of faith is obscene.

To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently, about the suffering of other human beings.

If god is good and loving and just and kind, and he wanted to guide us morally with a book, why give us a book that supports slavery? Why give us a book that admonishes us to kill people for imaginary crimes like witchcraft? But this to me is the true horror of religion.

It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.

-Sam Harris

Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.

On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.

The cosmos is indifferent to all of it. Sam when he dies in a short while will be no better off than the slave owning and child trafficking bible toting reprobate, or the fruit fly who eats poop for a living.

By virtue of his genes and physiological makeup, he thinks what he is talking about is actually meaningful but it is nothing more than the expression of socio-biological processes in action which work for one end...survival.

His many words and your nod of approval is fundamentally no different than my fart or burp.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-05-2014, 08:22 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(13-05-2014 08:03 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(12-05-2014 11:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  /thread





Nine million children die every year before they reach the age of five. Picture an Asian tsunami of the sort we saw in 2004 that killed a quarter of a million people. One of those every ten days, killing children only under five. 24,000 children a day, 1,000 an hour, 17 or so a minute. That means that before I can get to the end of this sentence, some few children very likely, will have died in terror and agony.

Think of the parents of these children. Think of the fact that most of these men and women believe in god, and are praying at this moment for their children to be spared; and their prayers will not be answered.

Any god who would allow children by the millions to suffer and die in this way, and their parents to grieve in this way, either can do nothing to help them or doesn't care to. He is therefore either impotent or evil.

We are told that god is loving and kind and just and intrinsically good, but when someone like myself points out the rather obvious compelling evidence that god is cruel and unjust because he visits such suffering on innocent people of a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we're told that god is mysterious; who can understand god's will?

If something good happens to a Christian, he feels some bliss while praying say or he sees some positive change in his life, and we're told that god is good. But when children by the tens of thousands are torn from their parent's arms and drowned, we are told that god is mysterious. I want to suggest to you that it is not only tiresome when otherwise intelligent people speak this way, it is morally reprehensible.

This kind of faith is really the perfection of narcissism. Given all that this god of yours does not accomplish in the lives of others. Given the misery that is being imposed on some helpless child at this instant. This kind of faith is obscene.

To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently, about the suffering of other human beings.

If god is good and loving and just and kind, and he wanted to guide us morally with a book, why give us a book that supports slavery? Why give us a book that admonishes us to kill people for imaginary crimes like witchcraft? But this to me is the true horror of religion.

It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.

-Sam Harris

Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.

On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.

The cosmos is indifferent to all of it. Sam when he dies in a short while will be no better off than the slave owning and child trafficking bible toting reprobate, or the fruit fly who eats poop for a living.

By virtue of his genes and physiological makeup, he thinks what he is talking about is actually meaningful but it is nothing more than the expression of socio-biological processes in action which work for one end...survival.

His many words and your nod of approval is fundamentally no different than my fart or burp.

See you do get it Thumbsup . The next step is finding meaning in your own life regardless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-05-2014, 08:37 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(13-05-2014 08:03 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(12-05-2014 11:47 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  /thread





Nine million children die every year before they reach the age of five. Picture an Asian tsunami of the sort we saw in 2004 that killed a quarter of a million people. One of those every ten days, killing children only under five. 24,000 children a day, 1,000 an hour, 17 or so a minute. That means that before I can get to the end of this sentence, some few children very likely, will have died in terror and agony.

Think of the parents of these children. Think of the fact that most of these men and women believe in god, and are praying at this moment for their children to be spared; and their prayers will not be answered.

Any god who would allow children by the millions to suffer and die in this way, and their parents to grieve in this way, either can do nothing to help them or doesn't care to. He is therefore either impotent or evil.

We are told that god is loving and kind and just and intrinsically good, but when someone like myself points out the rather obvious compelling evidence that god is cruel and unjust because he visits such suffering on innocent people of a scope and scale that would embarrass the most ambitious psychopath, we're told that god is mysterious; who can understand god's will?

If something good happens to a Christian, he feels some bliss while praying say or he sees some positive change in his life, and we're told that god is good. But when children by the tens of thousands are torn from their parent's arms and drowned, we are told that god is mysterious. I want to suggest to you that it is not only tiresome when otherwise intelligent people speak this way, it is morally reprehensible.

This kind of faith is really the perfection of narcissism. Given all that this god of yours does not accomplish in the lives of others. Given the misery that is being imposed on some helpless child at this instant. This kind of faith is obscene.

To think in this way is to fail to reason honestly, or to care sufficiently, about the suffering of other human beings.

If god is good and loving and just and kind, and he wanted to guide us morally with a book, why give us a book that supports slavery? Why give us a book that admonishes us to kill people for imaginary crimes like witchcraft? But this to me is the true horror of religion.

It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own.

-Sam Harris

Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.

On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.

The cosmos is indifferent to all of it. Sam when he dies in a short while will be no better off than the slave owning and child trafficking bible toting reprobate, or the fruit fly who eats poop for a living.

By virtue of his genes and physiological makeup, he thinks what he is talking about is actually meaningful but it is nothing more than the expression of socio-biological processes in action which work for one end...survival.

His many words and your nod of approval is fundamentally no different than my fart or burp.


Why is it that the fucktard divine command theory rape apologist is now trying his best impersonation of a narcissistic nihilist?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
13-05-2014, 09:00 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(13-05-2014 08:37 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(13-05-2014 08:03 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.

On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.

The cosmos is indifferent to all of it. Sam when he dies in a short while will be no better off than the slave owning and child trafficking bible toting reprobate, or the fruit fly who eats poop for a living.

By virtue of his genes and physiological makeup, he thinks what he is talking about is actually meaningful but it is nothing more than the expression of socio-biological processes in action which work for one end...survival.

His many words and your nod of approval is fundamentally no different than my fart or burp.


Why is it that the fucktard divine command theory rape apologist is now trying his best impersonation of a narcissistic nihilist?

Because he keeps backing the wrong horse, argument-wise, and runs away the moment we show it's a dead horse. In another week he'll be onto... I dunno, probably some ontological argument.

After a while, we should have enough statistical data to demonstrate that him supporting an argument is itself evidence that it's a bad argument. These apologists are kinda like dowsing rods, only instead of pointing to water, they point to sucky logic. Oh, and consistently. So they're not like dowsing rods at all.

But I doubt he'll ever once have the humility to ask WHY he's so consistently having the rug pulled out from under him. He's specifically avoided epistemology whenever it was brought up, and that's why he keeps failing.

((And, to be fair, he was never DEFENDING rape as a concept, he'd just deluded himself into thinking it didn't happen in the Bible, and kept up that denial way too long. .... and then ran away from the concept the moment the defense became untenable even for him, and never had the courage to consider WHY he had been accidentally bearing false witness, and how to avoid doing so again in the future.))
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Reltzik's post
13-05-2014, 09:18 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(13-05-2014 08:03 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.
On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.

You speak as if a thing does not ultimately have significance, that it has no significance. $1 and a $1 million are equally distant from infinity, but a quantifiable difference between the two exists none the less. If you can tell the difference between a dollar and a million dollars you can recognise the difference between human morality and human immorality. No god needed, which is just as well given the apparent absence of such a being from existence.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Hafnof's post
13-05-2014, 09:24 AM
RE: A Deconstruction of the Moral Argument
(13-05-2014 08:03 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Sam Harris talks as if this has any ultimate significance.

On atheism it has no ultimate significance whatsover.


What, are you fucking Bill Larry Craig, with this "on atheism..." bullshit? Learn English, motherfucker.



Quote:The cosmos is indifferent to all of it. Sam when he dies in a short while will be no better off than the slave owning and child trafficking bible toting reprobate, or the fruit fly who eats poop for a living.

Unless, of course, he leaves a legacy of work that affects people in the future, which is a hell of a lot more likely that anything YOU will do.

Quote:....my fart or burp.

....is the sum total of your "contribution" to this forum.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: