Musings of a Deconverting Mind
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-07-2015, 02:37 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 01:36 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 12:52 PM)unfogged Wrote:  There seems to be quite enough context for me. Yahweh is a thoroughly despicable character.
Then in your opinion a woman(mother) and a doctor who kills a baby( a boy or a girl) in the womb are despicable characters.

There is simply no logical connection between what I said and what you responded with.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
26-07-2015, 02:38 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 01:34 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 10:44 AM)epronovost Wrote:  You can't kill what is unborn. It's an oxymoron. It's like destroying what's not created yet.
Yes, you can. You can kill unborn living creature. Living creature that already has gender, body with arms and legs and fingers, and with heart that beats, and with liver that doctor can sell. This living creature kicks, yawn, suck the thumb.
There is a little boy or a little girl in the womb. It is developing and continue to develop when it is outside the womb.
Is it moral to kill a child that lives in the womb in a barbaric way and then sell his/her organs?

So morality only applies if after the age of viability? By your own words, it is neither moral or immoral if the fetus can't survive. And to answer your question, it depends. Is it moral to do it if the parts save 20 lives?

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Organic Chemist's post
26-07-2015, 02:39 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 02:10 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Oh for fuck's sake, stop adding shaded emotional elements to your arguments, Alla!

The "and then sell their organs" part is irrelevant, but it does imply that that was the purpose of the killing. It's a dishonest way of shading your arguments, and we see right through that kind of shit.

This is why religionists piss off anyone who has learned to think for themselves. You might snow over the average joker with no knowledge of rhetoric or logic, but it doesn't work here. Be honest or be gone.

The fact is, it's not a question of absolute morality; only a child thinks in terms of absolute morality, black and white, good and bad. The question you're ACTUALLY facing here is not "is killing babies evil", it's "Which is the lesser evil, abortion or taking legal control of the uterus away from all women and depriving them of bodily autonomy?"

In terms of your God, then, the argument would be "Is God justified in killing all those people, as described in the Bible stories?" (You keep hinting around about it, and it's driving me fucking crazy. It's neither coy nor clever. Just fucking say what you have to say, and stop with the "tell you later" and "why don't you tell me" false face!)

What we see in the Bible tales is an invented Deity, made up by men/priests, as a hyper-powerful copy of the basic model of Bronze/Iron Age barbarian-warrior-kings, complete with jealousy, wrath, and every other barbaric-society motivation and the full range of human emotion. As capricious as the Greek pantheon, this God of yours appears to be, to us. Except the Greek pantheon never demanded a tenth of the blood of the barbaric desert-peoples' Blood God that you apparently follow. Tell us more about the blood sacrifices, the arcane rituals of blood appeasement and atonement, and why this being's murderous commands to his followers don't indicate a psychopathic Blood God for psychopathic followers... because I just can't see it any other way, right this moment.

So it is incumbent upon you, the Believer who feels this deity is worthy of worship/service, not us, to explain exactly why this deity's obvious murderous streak is not the most horrific thing I've ever read (and I read a lot), and why this being is worthy of worship. I'd be shocked if you're the first person in nearly 40 years of hearing religious stories to come up with a version that doesn't turn my stomach... it's hard to listen to people try to defend a Blood God™.

[Image: blood-for-the-blood-god-13.png]

If one does not ignore the Bible then I think there is no way to claim that christians favorite tyrant is worthy of worship. But it's not about it at all - believers I think have their personal god which is molded to their liking; god in which they believe can not be evil. Also not reading the Bible could be a thing coupled with buiying banals about christianity being religion of love.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
26-07-2015, 03:03 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 02:22 PM)Octapulse Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 10:36 AM)Alla Wrote:  Yes, and this is exactly my point.
There is no enough contextual information in the Bible why God killed babies.

Really??

I guess you never learned proper fucking exegesis. jahoobla killed the children because he was having a hissy fit over the pharoah not letting the Israelites go (by the way there is absolutely zero evidence that the jews were ever in Egypt. None)
1) I don't care about zero evidence. Zero evidence means nothing to me.
2)So, you say that God killed babies because He had a hissy fit over the pharaoh not letting the Israelites go.
How about this for the reason:
Pharaoh and Egyptians treated Israelites and their children and babies badly. They(Israelites) were slaves. Slavery is evil.
Is it moral to kill babies who will become slave traders like their fathers in order to save babies who were already slaves?

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2015, 03:14 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 01:34 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 10:44 AM)epronovost Wrote:  You can't kill what is unborn. It's an oxymoron. It's like destroying what's not created yet.
Yes, you can. You can kill unborn living creature. Living creature that already has gender, body with arms and legs and fingers, and with heart that beats, and with liver that doctor can sell. This living creature kicks, yawn, suck the thumb.
There is a little boy or a little girl in the womb. It is developing and continue to develop when it is outside the womb.
Is it moral to kill a child that lives in the womb in a barbaric way and then sell his/her organs?

The term you are inferring in that example isn't killing, it’s aborting. In a sense, aborting is a form of killing much like cutting out a tumor is killing a tumor or removing a kidney will kill it if it’s not transplanted quickly or preserved in an adequate fashion. Not all fetus display gender, organs, etc. They develop those characteristics at different points in their growth should they survive up to that point. Usually, we consider alive a human after is birth that's why your age is calculated from the moment you are born and not from the moment your heart started beating three months and a half earlier. Your existence in the society is also only recognised at your birth when your name is registered and you receive your social security number or other form of status. In the medical world, a human can be considered alive when he can breathe on his own without assistance. Unborn human don't breathe on their own they «parasite» (the word sounds harsh I know, but it describe well the relationship) their mothers for oxygen and food. It’s a bit of a semantic debate I know, but the term killing has a very strong emotional charge that we may want to avoid when other terms are more apt to describe a situation like murdering, aborting, euthanizing, executing, etc.

To your question, I would say no, it’s not wrong to kill an unborn child in a «barbaric way» and sell his organs has long has you don't hurt the mother physically and/or psychologically and that the organs are sold in a responsible fashion for a acceptable price and potentially given for free to someone who would need them in an urgent manner and be too poor to afford it. Feel free to ask me why, but I will have to answer this question by PM because I think the explanation and the debate that could follow is irrelevant to this thread.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2015, 03:22 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  1) I don't care about zero evidence. Zero evidence means nothing to me.

I see. No evidence=some higher power. Just like a true scientist, accept a hypothesis with no evidence. Facepalm

(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  2)So, you say that God killed babies because He had a hissy fit over the pharaoh not letting the Israelites go.
How about this for the reason:
Pharaoh and Egyptians treated Israelites and their children and babies badly.

Except for the fact that the story also says that god also killed slave babies as well and it came to that point only because god hardened pharoah's heart more than once. Facepalm

(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  They(Israelites) were slaves.

Except the work of Finkelstein has shown this to me incorrect. Facepalm

(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  Slavery is evil.

Then why is not not even once condemned as evil in the book of mortality? Not once. Facepalm

(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  Is it moral to kill babies who will become slave traders like their fathers in order to save babies who were already slaves?

It is more moral than killing babies whose parents had absolutely nothing to do with the situation (i.e. the slaves and the Egyptians who didn't have slaves). You have yet to make any actual point. Facepalm

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
26-07-2015, 03:26 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 02:38 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 01:34 PM)Alla Wrote:  Yes, you can. You can kill unborn living creature. Living creature that already has gender, body with arms and legs and fingers, and with heart that beats, and with liver that doctor can sell. This living creature kicks, yawn, suck the thumb.
There is a little boy or a little girl in the womb. It is developing and continue to develop when it is outside the womb.
Is it moral to kill a child that lives in the womb in a barbaric way and then sell his/her organs?
So morality only applies if after the age of viability?
I don't want to preach morality to atheists. I am not here to tell what is moral and what is immoral.
But I read an argument that God of Israel is immoral because He killed babies.
Then I look at humans who kill babies and then sell their organs. And they say that it is not immoral.
(26-07-2015 02:38 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  By your own words, it is neither moral or immoral if the fetus can't survive. And to answer your question, it depends. Is it moral to do it if the parts save 20 lives?
Hmm... is it moral to kill me in order to save the life of the person who needs my heart or my liver? Let me think. In my humble opinion: No, it is not moral!!!
Can we kill you to save 20 lives? is it moral in your opinion?

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
But God did not attack the Israelites themselves, who owned slaves themseves by God's command (Leviticus 25:44-46). They could even beat their slaves to death, provided the slave didn't die immediately as a result of a too harsh beating (Exodus 21:20-21).

By the way, God doesn't mind abortion either (see next verse, Exodus 21:22-25) -

22 If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

(Bold emphasis my own.)

You get it? God doesn't give a crap about the life of that "unborn" baby in the womb, but if it affects the living people, then it's "eye for an eye", etc.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
26-07-2015, 03:29 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 03:03 PM)Alla Wrote:  I don't care about zero evidence. Zero evidence means nothing to me.

There you have it. I always find it tragic when anybody can say something so despicable with such pride.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
26-07-2015, 03:29 PM
RE: Musings of a Deconverting Mind
(26-07-2015 03:26 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(26-07-2015 02:38 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  So morality only applies if after the age of viability?
I don't want to preach morality to atheists. I am not here to tell what is moral and what is immoral.
But I read an argument that God of Israel is immoral because He killed babies.
Then I look at humans who kill babies and then sell their organs. And they say that it is not immoral.
(26-07-2015 02:38 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  By your own words, it is neither moral or immoral if the fetus can't survive. And to answer your question, it depends. Is it moral to do it if the parts save 20 lives?
Hmm... is it moral to kill me in order to save the life of the person who needs my heart or my liver? Let me think. In my humble opinion: No, it is not moral!!!
Can we kill you to save 20 lives? is it moral in your opinion?

Where are you that you witness baby organ selling?

Citation needed...

And...organ donors have their organs harvested after death or at least after brain death.

Again citation needed...and stop with whatever drug you are doing.

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
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: