Is God a moral monster?
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-05-2014, 04:24 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:19 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 12:51 PM)Dom Wrote:  Moral obligations are a human construct, as I mentioned before. Morals are based on empathy (the survival of the species instinct) and enforced by the law.

If you want to know what happens when religious law is left to enforce morals - see Muslim countries, where gods commands are still taken literally and people are being stoned to death for all kinds of reasons.

Kinda like this...
"Gang-raped Indonesian woman may be caned publicly"
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/gan...ly/1248212

What freaks me out the most about this thread is how it reminds me of the pedophile pushers from last year. Right now even the better angels of my nature have armed themselves and are calling for a public hanging.

Got the same vibe...the guy is looking for someone to agree that rape is okay if you can't help it.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
07-05-2014, 04:24 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:20 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 03:52 PM)Impulse Wrote:  For at least the majority here, I think the issue is not so much theists, but certain types of theists. Theists who are 1) willing to discuss without the arrogant tone, 2) present substantive arguments (substantive being something that has some thought behind it and isn't just uneducated parroting), and 3) show a sincere effort at intellectual honesty are generally treated politely. "Politely" doesn't exclude being confronted by their errors in logic though - it's how they're confronted that is different. Theists who don't fit the above three traits are generally not treated as politely (and are also the majority) because they really want to lecture, preach, or troll, and not discuss.

I am all for deconstructing arguments and calling that argument ridiculous if it is ridiculous. I just don't see the point in calling a person a cunt. It doesn't provide anything new to chew on, its just an empty insult. Some people add it at the end of an otherwise good post, like "your wrong for these reasons, and btw your cunt" which is not quite so bad. The worst is when people post just to say "hey, your a cunt". Why?

I would find it much more satisfying to pin them on their argument and show it to be false. Watching someone back track is great, and even if they don't admit it, you know your right and that is awesome. Calling someone a cunt makes that so much harder to do, because then half the conversation is "he's a cunt", and "no, I'm not a cunt" and all I want to do is nail the guy for being wrong.

Keep it up, and you will have a reputation like mine! Thumbsup

Nah Michael, I largely ignore the little quips and one liners. They contain nothing new as you stated and I am so used to hearing them that the words have lost all of their venom. It is like a child on a playground that repeats one word or phrase over and over again that they think is going to get people's attention, all the time unaware that no one is really paying them any.

In my former days, I could out curse and out slander even the best slanderers presently here with us in this forum. I actually am amused by all of the hostility and rather enjoy it. It lets me know that my words are not falling on deaf ears.
Find all posts by this user
07-05-2014, 04:24 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:20 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 03:52 PM)Impulse Wrote:  For at least the majority here, I think the issue is not so much theists, but certain types of theists. Theists who are 1) willing to discuss without the arrogant tone, 2) present substantive arguments (substantive being something that has some thought behind it and isn't just uneducated parroting), and 3) show a sincere effort at intellectual honesty are generally treated politely. "Politely" doesn't exclude being confronted by their errors in logic though - it's how they're confronted that is different. Theists who don't fit the above three traits are generally not treated as politely (and are also the majority) because they really want to lecture, preach, or troll, and not discuss.

I am all for deconstructing arguments and calling that argument ridiculous if it is ridiculous. I just don't see the point in calling a person a cunt. It doesn't provide anything new to chew on, its just an empty insult. Some people add it at the end of an otherwise good post, like "your wrong for these reasons, and btw your cunt" which is not quite so bad. The worst is when people post just to say "hey, your a cunt". Why?

I would find it much more satisfying to pin them on their argument and show it to be false. Watching someone back track is great, and even if they don't admit it, you know your right and that is awesome. Calling someone a cunt makes that so much harder to do, because then half the conversation is "he's a cunt", and "no, I'm not a cunt" and all I want to do is nail the guy for being wrong.

Solution: don't be a cunt.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like rampant.a.i.'s post
07-05-2014, 04:26 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:24 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 04:20 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I am all for deconstructing arguments and calling that argument ridiculous if it is ridiculous. I just don't see the point in calling a person a cunt. It doesn't provide anything new to chew on, its just an empty insult. Some people add it at the end of an otherwise good post, like "your wrong for these reasons, and btw your cunt" which is not quite so bad. The worst is when people post just to say "hey, your a cunt". Why?

I would find it much more satisfying to pin them on their argument and show it to be false. Watching someone back track is great, and even if they don't admit it, you know your right and that is awesome. Calling someone a cunt makes that so much harder to do, because then half the conversation is "he's a cunt", and "no, I'm not a cunt" and all I want to do is nail the guy for being wrong.

Keep it up, and you will have a reputation like mine! Thumbsup

Nah Michael, I largely ignore the little quips and one liners. They contain nothing new as you stated and I am so used to hearing them that the words have lost all of their venom. It is like a child on a playground that repeats one word or phrase over and over again that they think is going to get people's attention, all the time unaware that no one is really paying them any attention.

Right, so the same thing you do when someone corrects you or objects to your arguments.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes rampant.a.i.'s post
07-05-2014, 04:27 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:24 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 04:19 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Kinda like this...
"Gang-raped Indonesian woman may be caned publicly"
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/gan...ly/1248212

What freaks me out the most about this thread is how it reminds me of the pedophile pushers from last year. Right now even the better angels of my nature have armed themselves and are calling for a public hanging.

Got the same vibe...the guy is looking for someone to agree that rape is okay if you can't help it.

Should people know better than to rape?
Find all posts by this user
07-05-2014, 04:28 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:15 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 04:07 PM)Monster_Riffs Wrote:  I completely agree. Timeouts ard insulting as fuck. I'd rather be banned than patronized

That is just it. You think people should not insult you. That insulting someone is a violation of some moral code of conduct that people are obligated to follow.

Why do you think that?

You still don't get it?

There is no code, no code violation, no obligation.

It makes sense to be nice to each other. Once you get that, maybe people will get along better with you here.

People here don't have a whole lot in common, we are all ages and colors and locations and socio-economic levels and what have you. There is only one thing we have in common - we don't believe in any gods.

Have you seen our support section? People taking care of each other, helping each other along.

Whatever pre-conceived idea you have about what "we" are like, you need to drop it and actually listen. Then you will establish positive contact.

You came here with all these misconceptions about us, how about listening instead of arguing. Then you may know better how to communicate with this lot.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
07-05-2014, 04:34 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:28 PM)Dom Wrote:  It makes sense to be nice to each other. Once you get that, maybe people will get along better with you here.

It makes sense to YOU. It does not makes sense to others. In fact, others positively find meaning in life by hating others and picking on and ridiculing others beliefs. Richard Dawkins said that religious people should be RIDICULED. A far cry from this being nice thing you think is so common sensical.

(07-05-2014 04:28 PM)Dom Wrote:  Whatever pre-conceived idea you have about what "we" are like, you need to drop it and actually listen. Then you will establish positive contact.

You came here with all these misconceptions about us, how about listening instead of arguing. Then you may know better how to communicate with this lot.

When people tell me there are no objective moral values, no right, no wrong, no good, no bad, I find it awfully inconsistent that these same people would say that I should be nice.....

I just find the usage of the word "should" to be inconsistent with the denial of moral values and duties.
Find all posts by this user
07-05-2014, 04:37 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:16 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 04:15 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  That is just it. You think people should not insult you. That insulting someone is a violation of some moral code of conduct that people are obligated to follow.

Why do you think that?

Shut the fuck up.

You aren't here to interact. You are here to be a pain in the ass.

I call Rule 5.

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
07-05-2014, 04:40 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:27 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 04:24 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Got the same vibe...the guy is looking for someone to agree that rape is okay if you can't help it.

Should people know better than to rape?

Really? Guess you get a pass for some reason around here.

Carry on. You're doing great.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
07-05-2014, 04:40 PM
RE: Is God a moral monster?
(07-05-2014 04:20 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  
(07-05-2014 03:52 PM)Impulse Wrote:  For at least the majority here, I think the issue is not so much theists, but certain types of theists. Theists who are 1) willing to discuss without the arrogant tone, 2) present substantive arguments (substantive being something that has some thought behind it and isn't just uneducated parroting), and 3) show a sincere effort at intellectual honesty are generally treated politely. "Politely" doesn't exclude being confronted by their errors in logic though - it's how they're confronted that is different. Theists who don't fit the above three traits are generally not treated as politely (and are also the majority) because they really want to lecture, preach, or troll, and not discuss.

I am all for deconstructing arguments and calling that argument ridiculous if it is ridiculous. I just don't see the point in calling a person a cunt. It doesn't provide anything new to chew on, its just an empty insult. Some people add it at the end of an otherwise good post, like "your wrong for these reasons, and btw your cunt" which is not quite so bad. The worst is when people post just to say "hey, your a cunt". Why?

I would find it much more satisfying to pin them on their argument and show it to be false. Watching someone back track is great, and even if they don't admit it, you know your right and that is awesome. Calling someone a cunt makes that so much harder to do, because then half the conversation is "he's a cunt", and "no, I'm not a cunt" and all I want to do is nail the guy for being wrong.

....says the cunt who pulled the very same shit as JEW does in your vegan batshit-religion thread. Hobo

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
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: