Originally posted by marwash22
please do.
No problem:
Originally posted by marwash22
i can be an upstanding citizen with strong moral and ethical codes... without believing in a fairytale.
Originally posted by dadudemon
But you cannot escape the inexorable truth of those laws being influenced by theistically influenced morals. Laws are morals made official. Some of those morals were dictated by religions.
Does that make sense, now?
Or would you like me to make it even simpler?
I'll skip the third simplification request and go here:
How about this: no man is an island.
Do you need it even simpler than that?
...again, what does that have to do with ME on a personal level?
I abide by laws because I am not interested in operating on fringe of societal norms... i could have no concept of what religion is, and i still would have no desire to have sex with kids, or murder anyone, or steal. Furthermore, if i were to do any of that, it would be jail that I'd fear, not the righteous hand of some imaginary figure i don't even believe in.
Laws stemming from religion is irrelevant because i do not follow "Gods" word... i drink, have premarital sex, goddammit, i even use "his" name in vain. If you're inferring that because I live within the law, i also follow the word of "God", you are a very shortsighted individual. Or maybe you're just trollin' me for your own amusement.
Originally posted by inimalist
yes, but I think there is a category of committed non-position. There are people who feel there is no evidence that could ever prove the existence of God one way or the other.I don't get it either, I just see no reason to put them in boxes they don't want to be in. Their arguments are also much different from "I don't know". I'd say look to what lil is saying in the evidence thread.
If one does not affirmatively believe in the existence of a phenomenon, whether he actively disbelieves in the existence of the phenomenon or simply does not believe that knowledge of the phenomenon is possible, his position is still unbelief.
Originally posted by marwash22
...again, what does that have to do with [b]ME on a personal level?I abide by laws because I am not interested in operating on fringe of societal norms... i could have no concept of what religion is, and i still would have no desire to have sex with kids, or murder anyone, or steal. Furthermore, if i were to do any of that, it would be jail that I'd fear, not the righteous hand of some imaginary figure i don't even believe in.
...Or maybe you're just trollin' me for your own amusement. [/B]
My point is absurdly obvious because it's in explicit terms. At this point, you're being dense on purpose as you actually know what my point was from the beginning and you have the audacity to accuse me of trollin. Get over yourself.
Originally posted by marwash22
Laws stemming from religion is irrelevant because i do not follow "Gods" word... i drink, have premarital sex, goddammit, i even use "his" name in vain. If you're inferring that because I live within the law, i also follow the word of "God", you are a very shortsighted individual.
And this gets to the crux of the problem. You just can't stand the fact that you have live by certain religious morals. Since the understanding to that concept requires a deeper thought process than the superficial and immature thought you've tried to place on your own behavior, the shortsightedness is on your part. You have to obey "God's word" via some laws and you can't stand it. Well, too bad. That's the way the world works.
Originally posted by marwash22
you're one of the most antagonistic people i've ever seen. welcome to my ignore list.
And yet, you're the one that pretended to be ignorant of my point (but actually were quite aware of it the whole time) and then accused me of trolling. Sure, I'm antagonistic. I gave you the benefit of the doubt no less than 3 times*: something I don't even do for people I consider KMC idiots.
*Something I shouldn't have done, knowing your past with others. But, hey, I'm just nice like that. I should have known I was being trolled.
Originally posted by dadudemonbut religous influence in western legislations (and others) has been hugely diminished today and tends to (almost) disappear in the future.
Kind of sucks, doesn't it? I wish these official "morals" such as not being able to have sex certain ways or with certain people, were not influenced by people. I'm REALLY cool with the "no sex with kids" official morals...but not the "no buttsex with your wife" or "no gay sex". I don't want gay sex or buttsex...but what does it matter? It matters, of course, because they are religiously influenced and should be dashed out of law. Secular law....sounds delicious.
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If one does not affirmatively believe in the existence of a phenomenon, whether he actively disbelieves in the existence of the phenomenon or simply does not believe that knowledge of the phenomenon is possible, his position is still unbelief.
I don't disagree, there are many philosophical interpretations of unbelief though
hell, there are even meaningful distinctions between non-identifying atheists, atheists proper, and anti-theists, who would all fall very clearly into the "unbelief" category
Originally posted by dadudemon
But you cannot escape the inexorable truth of those laws being influenced by theistically influenced morals. Laws are morals made official. Some of those morals were dictated by religions.
I'd really only think that would apply to dietary or attire laws... and even then, the influence is more about establishing "who we are" vs a "Them", rather than morality
implicit morality almost certainly informed religious morality, not the other way around. this is upheld by observations of any social animal species I can think of, they all have social regulatory mechanisms that reduce inter-group hostilities
for a long period of time, sure, christianity was the power that made laws, that is simply correlation though. You cant simply assume that the moral character of the laws themselves reflects anything to do with christian doctrine, and the biological/psychological evidence suggests otherwise
Originally posted by 753
but religous influence in western legislations (and others) has been hugely diminished today and tends to (almost) disappear in the future.
Which is a REALLY good thing, imo.
However, we still have shit come up like abortion related legislation, MJ laws, and Prop8.
Originally posted by inimalist
I'd really only think that would apply to dietary or attire laws... and even then, the influence is more about establishing "who we are" vs a "Them", rather than moralityimplicit morality almost certainly informed religious morality, not the other way around. this is upheld by observations of any social animal species I can think of, they all have social regulatory mechanisms that reduce inter-group hostilities
for a long period of time, sure, christianity was the power that made laws, that is simply correlation though. You cant simply assume that the moral character of the laws themselves reflects anything to do with christian doctrine, and the biological/psychological evidence suggests otherwise
Before you read the rest: it would apply to dietary, attire, sexual relations, drugs, even how we interact with each other.
After reading that, I don't think you disagree with me, even a little.
Note that I never once said that most laws, I used the word "some." This is why we agree.
Also, I wasn't talking just about Christianity, either.
Also, you discussion of "chicken or the egg" is interesting and part of basic sociology, but not directly relevant to our discussion. Morality in religion and their origins is not the point. It's the "I am an island" attitude I saw from another poster that made me want to speak up. It's pretty damn hard to be secular.
Originally posted by dadudemon
And this gets to the crux of the problem. You just can't stand the fact that you have live by certain religious morals. Since the understanding to that concept requires a deeper thought process than the superficial and immature thought you've tried to place on your own behavior, the shortsightedness is on your part. You have to obey "God's word" via some laws and you can't stand it. Well, too bad. That's the way the world works.
Originally posted by King Kandy
But surely you see the difference between obeying a law because its the law, and obeying because you personally feel the law is moral. There are countless laws I abide by for no reason beyond not wanting to cause trouble. The point is, I don't have to BELIEVE in those morals to apply them in practice.
That was the never the problem.
I understand that. I just didn't like the naive attitude that some people have...young people mostly...that they think they can live in a wholly secular world. That's simply not possible. The theists are up everyone's asses and it's unavoidable.
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
If there is a god, I doubt that he would be petty enough to care whether or not I believe in him, and show up for attendance on Sundays. Like a supreme being needs me to validate it's theoretical existence?
This was such a good post that I ALMOST put it in my profile. It really captures my thoughts on the matter. I think all of that "symbolic" shit is more for the person than God.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That was the never the problem.I understand that. I just didn't like the naive attitude that some people have...young people mostly...that they think they can live in a wholly secular world. That's simply not possible. The theists are up everyone's asses and it's unavoidable.
Also, aren't YOU a theist?
Originally posted by Digi
...just another person who can't comprehend how a person can have purpose and morality without God. A limited, insulated view. Not only is it possible, but it's easy. I don't feel a need to explain to you the myriad ways in which it is possible, because without an intrinsic understanding of how natural and simple it is, it would be like trying to explain a foreign language to a child who doesn't even know that other countries or languages exist.But to answer the titular question, I doubt any atheist fears judgment. Why would they?
Wow, exactly what I was thinking. Great post. I personally find it much more comforting for a person to do the right things on their own and not because they are afraid of reprisal from God or whoever their spiritual leader may be.