Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not all atheists are rationalists.
Not all atheists are anything in particular. And the non-belief in a deity, which is all atheism is, has literally nothing to say about morality. Nothing. Blaming "atheist morality" (which doesn't actually exist, though Christian mroality certainly does) is like blaming a child for hitting someone because he believes in Santa. The two are unrelated.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Completely disagree with you there Digi.Those monsters flying the planes had a hatred for anything that the is consider Americanism and capitalism.
They hate us and even if there was no God. They still hate us for what we have and what we believe.
We have what they don't have. Which is FREEDOM. That's why they hate us.
Take away their belief in an afterlife, which is an irrational belief based on faith rather than evidence, and would the attacks still have happened? Much less likely.
....
The most common idea I see here is that atheists have no standard form of morality, and thus are predisposed to violence. First, this would assume that if left to their own reason, most people will settle on violence. Second, atheism itself is simply a belief in no deity....any moral decisions people make beyond that are their own, and not linked to the body that is "atheism". On the contrary, most religious texts advocate some form of violence (Islam clearly, and Christianity for those who are willing to be honest about their scriptures) and anyone acting on their behalf is actually acting "for" their religion. "Atheist morality" doesn't exist. It's individual choice. "Christian morality" most certainly does exist, or Islam, etc. Anything done from a moral standpoint under those religions is a direct reflection of the religion.
Most modern morality (at least standard morality in society) is leagues beyond what would have been practiced or preached in any ancient religion. I'm much more willing to trust someone who is using modern standards of goodness to decide their morals, than someone who takes vague, multi-interpretational text from millenia ago and act as though it is infallible.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Actually it does, because it removes barriers that would normally make a person say "Wait a minute, this is wrong."
I dealt with most of this above. But religious ideals are as arbitrary and flawed as any person's morality might be if they determined it for themselves. You're saying that Christian (or religious) morality has the objective final say in what is right and wrong, but it doesn't, and most times it's completely f*cked up when you actually read what people use religion to justify.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If the claim is made that "atheism is based on reason" (which it was) then all of it's followers must be rationalists and have a reason for what they do.
The point was made because it doesn't have faith involved with it. So I stand by it. I wasn't implying that all atheists are rationalists. That was an addition you made. But none have blind faith that leads to irrational violence. They may be irrational anyway, but it's from something other than their atheism.