|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. No we certainly are NOT, at least Im not... The debate, as I understand it, is whether a fear of judgement by some sort of supernatural entity was the driver for humanity to want to treat each other better or if it was just a biological function of having to work together to survive and pass on our genes.... I was saying that because you quoted a section of my reply to Enzo.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world (than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations You're right about that. Just about every western country operates independently of religion these days. (Separation of Church and state is in nearly every constitution.) There are a few hangovers of course like not being able to get an abortion, not having euthanasia and not being able to marry whoever the hell you want. But in the main if religion disappeared from Australia tomorrow the 1 or 2% of people THAT ATTEND church might miss it. No one else would. I'll tell you who goes to church in my town. Refugees and Phillipinos. I know because I see them when I drop mum off. If it wasn't for them they'd be shutting up shop. I havent been to church (apart from weddings/funerals and the like) for over 20 years yet still believe in God, whats your point? That organised religion is becoming less popular as social media and gender fluidity now fills our lives with more meaningful pursuits???? I dont get the relevance of church attendance? To clarify I'm saying that religion and a belief in the supernatural are not necessary to the running of a country. If the church disappeared tomorrow hardly anyone would bat an eyelid. I mean you don't go nor do 98% of the Australian population. Enzo is making a big deal out of the fact that every country is religious. I'm saying they're religious in name only. 'No religion' recently became the second biggest category in the census and it's trending up. I think a lot of people would say they're religious that aren't in the slightest, save for saying, they believe in god. God and/or religion plays no part in their life. Virtually none. It's like calling yourself an atheist. A lot of people don't have the guts to say they are. But reword the question and then it's 39% 'no religious affiliation'. And it's trending up. It may not break 50% next census but probably will the one after. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/religious-affiliation-australia
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xHere's an interesting study that won't surprise non-believers. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19955414/Paper linked from this article. (Excerpt below.) https://theconversation.com/religion-does-not-determine-your-morality-97895Experimental evidence suggests that people’s opinion of what God thinks is right and wrong tracks what they believe is right and wrong, not the other way around.
Social psychologist Nicholas Epley and his colleagues surveyed religious believers about their moral beliefs and the moral beliefs of God. Not surprisingly, what people thought was right and wrong matched up pretty well with what they felt God’s morality was like.
Then Epley and his fellow researchers attempted to manipulate their participants’ moral beliefs with persuasive essays. If convinced, their moral opinion should then be different from God’s, right?
Wrong. When respondents were asked again what God thought, people reported that God agreed with their new opinion!
Therefore, people didn’t come to believe that God is wrong, they just updated their opinion on what God thinks.
When you change someone’s moral beliefs, you also change their opinion on what God thinks. Yet most surveyed still clung to the illusion that they got their moral compass from what they think God believes is right and wrong. "manipulate" and "persuasive" says it all really Muz.... That's rather dismissive. The paper shows people align what they take out of the bible based on their internal moral compass. And that's easily demonstrable. Even in this thread you've got a bloke here that thinks the earth is 6000 years old, others that think it's not, other christians that think gays can marry, others that think not, evangelicals in America thinking you shouldn't have sex before marriage, people here thinking it's OK, abortion bad, abortion Ok. And where did they get all those ideas? Spoiler alert: The bible. Well they can't all be right. So yeah people take out of the bible what they want to believe. Which is my overarching point. IE they choose their morals. They're not set down from on high at all unless you're telling me that pre bible people didn't know it wasn't the done thing to kill someone. (Excluding wars and conflict.) None of this is surprising. What the paper is showing is how easily the bible can be shifted to fit their new perception.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. +x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc Depends on what you mean by "driven by". What I can name is many successful countries where the majority of the population sees itself as religious I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. Secularists are in the minority here, and in every successful modern country in the world, yet they feel its the opposite. Worse they would- if they could- remove the freedom of religion in our Constitution. Ok, so there is absolutely none in the world. Got it. As for those stats, as if 6/10 Aussies are 'religious'. Laughable. That's why churches across the country are empty. Also, various ethnic groups across the world, ones that have had zero communication with each other have shared principles - it really has bugger all to do with one person's religion giving everyone a doctrine. Religion in the United States- Protestantism (34%)
- Catholicism (23%)
- Non-specific Christian (11%)
- Mormonism (2%)
- Judaism (2%)
- Other religions (6%)
- Unaffiliated with organized forms of religion (21%)
- No answer (1%)
As the Yanks like to say "there are no atheists in a foxhole" they should know as they happily spread the word of God to all the "heathens" around the world.... " I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," I'm not sure if you're being facetious but in case you're not. (You'd know all of this anyway.) Culturally Americans are far more religious than most western countries. Admitting you're an atheist in America is akin to admitting you're a child molester. If you think I'm joking. https://time.com/109050/a-nation-of-growing-atheists-still-wouldnt-trust-one-to-run-the-country/Or this one. Biggest negative for a politician is, you guessed it, declaring themselves an atheist. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/05/19/for-2016-hopefuls-washington-experience-could-do-more-harm-than-good/https://www.learnreligions.com/atheists-trusted-less-than-rapists-248477It's not surprising the average American would profess to be religious. You dont have to believe the world was created 6000 years ago and some Jewish dude walked on water t o find comfort in the fact that the universe isnt just some cold dark random place and being a decent, empathetic person doesnt make you an evolutionary loser but a contributor to a better experience for your fellow man. ... There's sound evolutionary reasons for the develop of religious beliefs. It's also not surprising that people seek a deeper meaning for their existence. None at all. But. I'm OK with the universe being a cold, unthinking, random place where we happen to exist. That's fine by me. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to know who I am or explain it. Our closest relatives in the primate world dont shun members of their species when they murder their own children or murder. They dont show remorse or guilt. They just eat, shit and breed and EVERY action revolves around doing that as efficiently and successfully as possible. @Mono. Sorry mate I meant to say this before. This was what people used to think. Much like how they used to say dogs don't have emotions. Anyone that owns a dog knows that they experience emotion. Pinched this from online. So rather than paraphrase it I'll cut and paste it. It does make you think though. All through history people have thought humanity exists apart from the animal kingdom. It's why we offer them so little regard. It's also why we see ourselves as having a higher purpose. But what if animals had morals? They've developed these morals without religion. Wouldn't that off some proof that morals existed outside of religion? The articles are hyperlinked. Maybe we're not as special as we think. Primates are an order of mammals that include humans, apes, monkeys, and lemurs. The question of whether they exhibit morality is not easy to answer, as different researchers may have different criteria for defining morality. However, some studies have suggested that certain primates can display moral emotions, such as empathy, compassion, grief, outrage, and fairness12Some examples of primate behaviours that may indicate moral sensibility are:
These are just some of the many examples of primates exhibiting moral emotions. However, not all researchers agree that these behaviors constitute true morality, and some may argue that they are based on instinct, social learning, or self-interest. Therefore, the question of primate morality remains a fascinating and controversial topic6
5 Animals With a Moral Compass | Animal Emotions | Live Science
Do Animas Know Right From Wrong? | Live Science
Debatable whether they have or not and it isnt just some sort of Pavlovian response to their owner. All "evidence" to the contrary is theoretical... anyway, wont labour the point, It's interesting though. Clearly animals don't have religion and yet exhibit moral behaviours. There's plenty of evidence of dolphins helping humans from being attacked from sharks and to help them from drowning. Hell there's a clip where a whale picks up a dropped cell phone and returns it and that's not from some zoo. https://youtube.com/shorts/4Jm0EX2yEcc?si=Ww3MnJ_CgVDF1oVAWhat's their motivation? It's convenient to dismiss it because it adds another complication to humans thinking they're special. How do you know these behaviours are moral and not just impulses driven by biological triggers like wanting to protect a weaker species or beleiveng a mobile phone was a bit of food to be retrieved? How can you attest to animals motivation when there is no comminicable way of knowung why animals do what they do.... Your (lower case) bible thumping mate may very well put it down to a benevolent God working his miracle through his creation .... how do we know one way or another.If it was a prevalent occurrence then i guess we can make an educated assumption however there have been thousands more cases of dolphins curiously engaging with humans and then just ignoring us all together or worse:. https://medium.com/@darkenergyarticles/the-dark-side-of-dolphins-they-kidnap-rape-and-murder-other-dolphins-and-humans-393b4ab9ce69I chose to not believe animals have emotional intelligence NOT because of some sort of moral dominion over them but because I want to be able to keep enjoying bacon and juicy juicy rib-eye ... hahahahahahahah Well that's why they run experiments. I'm telling you right now this is just the beginning. (Pigs are smarter than dogs. I have very uncomfortable feelings about pigs locked up in cages.) One bite on a mobile phone would tell you it wasn't food and they would have dropped it. They're not stupid. Regards your wayward dolphins. Humans rape and murder other humans that doesn't mean the species doesn't have feelings of empathy or morals. The fact dolphins rape and murder is proof of nothing except that they're capable of rape and murder. Empathy and the brain (parentingscience.com)Empathy in nonhuman animals
In one experiment, 15 rhesus monkeys were trained to get food by pulling chains. Monkeys quickly learned that one chain delivered twice as much food than the other. But then the rules changed: If a monkey pulled the chain associated with the bigger reward, another “bystander” monkey received an electric shock.
After seeing their conspecific get a shock, 10 of the monkeys switched their preferences to the chain associated with the lesser food reward. Two other monkeys stopped pulling either chain—preferring to starve rather than see another monkey in pain (Masserman et al 1964).
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
roosty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 758,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. +x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc Depends on what you mean by "driven by". What I can name is many successful countries where the majority of the population sees itself as religious I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. Secularists are in the minority here, and in every successful modern country in the world, yet they feel its the opposite. Worse they would- if they could- remove the freedom of religion in our Constitution. Ok, so there is absolutely none in the world. Got it. As for those stats, as if 6/10 Aussies are 'religious'. Laughable. That's why churches across the country are empty. Also, various ethnic groups across the world, ones that have had zero communication with each other have shared principles - it really has bugger all to do with one person's religion giving everyone a doctrine. - Protestantism (34%)
- Catholicism (23%)
- Non-specific Christian (11%)
- Mormonism (2%)
- Judaism (2%)
- Other religions (6%)
- Unaffiliated with organized forms of religion (21%)
- No answer (1%)
As the Yanks like to say "there are no atheists in a foxhole" they should know as they happily spread the word of God to all the "heathens" around the world.... " I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," I'm not sure if you're being facetious but in case you're not. (You'd know all of this anyway.) Culturally Americans are far more religious than most western countries. Admitting you're an atheist in America is akin to admitting you're a child molester. If you think I'm joking. https://time.com/109050/a-nation-of-growing-atheists-still-wouldnt-trust-one-to-run-the-country/Or this one. Biggest negative for a politician is, you guessed it, declaring themselves an atheist. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/05/19/for-2016-hopefuls-washington-experience-could-do-more-harm-than-good/https://www.learnreligions.com/atheists-trusted-less-than-rapists-248477It's not surprising the average American would profess to be religious. You dont have to believe the world was created 6000 years ago and some Jewish dude walked on water t o find comfort in the fact that the universe isnt just some cold dark random place and being a decent, empathetic person doesnt make you an evolutionary loser but a contributor to a better experience for your fellow man. ... I'm OK with the universe being a cold, unthinking, random place where we happen to exist. That's fine by me. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to know who I am or explain it. Are you OK with terrorism, murder, child molesters, genocide and rape? That is the logical extension of a cold, unthinking, random universe, everything within it is also cold, unthinking and random, including life, morality, purpose. Sure there is the performance theater of being outwardly angry, for the purpose of fitting in socially and maximizing your reproductive potential, but in your quieter, private moments do you engage the higher functioning part of your brain and admit to yourself that it's all just bullshit? I'm ok with atheists, but I noticed many atheists are reluctant to be atheists when it comes to their own internal dialogue about themselves, morality, existence and love, and choose to indulge in religious superstition in a clumsy foolhardy attempt to deny nihilsm. Being a true atheist isn't just about not believing in god and thinking you will rot when you die, that's easy that part, the hard, brave part is admitting everything about everything is bullshit. My personally philosophy is a mixture of try and treat everyone like you'd like to be treated, try and help some people along the way if you can and leave the world a slightly better place than when you entered it. That's it. Really the best you can really hope for is to be remembered fondly. This is santa clause for atheists lol As an atheist the only personal philosophy you can honestly subscribe to is “ everything including my life, everything and everyone in it is random, involuntary and meaningless” Sure you can confect some silly beliefs about helping others and being remembered fondly blah blah, but isn’t that what you argue the religious people do, confect beliefs to find meaning and comfort in the cold, dark universe? How do you confront someone whose personal philosophy is to rape as many women as possible? As a true atheist you would have to concede that person isn’t morally wrong or evil since those are pseudo religious terms and that the rapist is in fact equal to you. In fact from an evolutionary perspective may even be more efficient at reproducing, so why not give them a high five rather than a jail sentence? Denying god is easy, you can live life the way you see fit and when you die you become worm food. No harm done. The hard part is accepting the consequences that come with denying god, admitting there is no good/evil, justice, free will, love, human rights, morality or meaning in anything, and then living your life according to those precepts. Instead atheists cop out and do what you would argue religious people do, indulge in magical thinking to cope and try to make sense of things. I don't need religion to have morals. Morals have evolved over time. (And will further evolve.) That's why it used to be ok to keep slaves, kill gays and belt your wife up in biblical times and now it's not. Even though the bible says those things are ok. (According to Enzo I'm taking these bits out of context. Uh huh.) As an atheist why would I high-five a murderer when I know that it's wrong. My non-belief in a god doesn't stop me from determining what is and isn't good behaviour. Would I care about someone I love being killed? Yes I would. Would I seek punishment? Yes I would. Can I empathise with someone I don't know being murdered through the magic of altruism that evolved hundreds of thousands of years ago in sub-Saharan Africa? Yes I would. Would I hope that they are punished? Yes I would. I don't know why you keep implying we're copping out by not believing in god. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to try and be a good person. (Good being relative to what societal expectations are today. Google up the origins of 'exposure' with regards to children for an eye opener on what used to be acceptable. You're missing my point. You don't need religion to have morals, but if you're an honest atheist who believes everything about the universe is accidental, random and meaningless, then by logical extension so is everything within the universe, including life, love and especially morals.
(A) You can't on one hand argue that the universe, filled with trillions of stars and planets in all its glory and splendour is meaningless, but on the other hand argue that invisible abstract things morality and personal beliefs are important and valuable.
(B) Yet you believe them anyway, so what does this all mean? It means, like you accuse religious people of, you also indulge in fantasy thinking to create an illusion of meaning, value and purpose in your life. The only difference is your illusion is logically inconsistent.
Morals aren't real, they are just corny human brain farts that simple people pathetically adhere to. Things like murder, rape aren't really bad, because notions of bad and evil are pseudo bullshit religious terms others bind us in to exploit and subjugate us. (C) You don't really love your children, you are just programmed by evolution to think you love them to ensure the survival of the species. (D) There is no such thing as free will, we are simply robots existing to in endless involuntary flow of atoms and molecules. This is logically consistent atheism.
(A) Why not? We randomly evolved. Randomly evolved feelings. And here we are. They're important to me because I'm a product of evolution. (B) I never said there was a meaning to life. I offered you my personal philosophy. What's the alternative? I don't want to rape and murder people. (C) This is probably true. That doesn't make those feelings not real. (D) This is a very interesting philosophical question. I've swung between thinking there is and isn't free will. I'm undecided at the moment. I'm trying to understand your point. Maybe I've missed it again. We've evolved to place value on things that we call morality due to altruism and other random things that were good for the group. Are morals meaningless? Well it depends on who you ask. What you think is normal and fine is disgusting and untenable by another group of humans. (Say gay marriage or female circumcision.) The love for my kids is probably (well actually not probable) a chemical reaction (dopamine levels are raised when you have children) that we evolved to care after our children. It is, after all, why they look so cute and smell great when they're young. So we look after them. Because sure as shit they'd die if they weren't cared for. Hormones and chemicals are probably doing the heavy lifting for sure. I've explained to you why I think morality is important. (We've evolved to care about other people for the good of the group and the propagation of the species. What more can I say? I don't need religion to tell me I'm upset because someone killed my kid or someone within my social group or further afield.) I've provided links that other animals display, what we would call, morality within their social groups. It appears that humans aren't special in this way. (But it is a given that in the main animals don't care at all. A fish thinks nothing when it eats another fish for example.) You cling to the supernatural if you want. I'm Ok over here. I'm off to give plasma this morning for the 5th time this year. I know a godless heathen shouldn't really care about others but maybe that's the beauty of being an unthinking robotic automaton. (I don't have to think about these things too hard.) I’m not saying that you have to be religious to be happy or have morals, I’m explaining to you that as an atheist your moral framework and beliefs about anything and everything is an illusion. It carries no real substance or objective meaning, so when you say things like “xyz is important to me” what you’re really saying “existence is random and meaningless, and that frightens me so I will confect some beliefs about morality, love, purpose etc so that now my life has meaning and I can enjoy it”. So thats my point, that you indulge in fantasy thinking to craft an internalised narrative that life has meaning, purpose and value, and this is logically inconsistent with the atheistic worldview the universe no has meaning, purpose or value. Now you might say that evolution made you that way, but its also true that evolution made billions of people believe in god, yet YOU engaged the higher functioning logical part of your brain to deny god. So taking things furrher why dont you engage the same part of your brain to deny the internalised narrative about meaning, purpose and value thats been force fed to you since birth? That’s the logical consequence of atheism, not only to deny god but to deny ALL illogical beliefs that humans cling too to provide meaning and hope where apparently none exists. So I would argue that if you continue to buy into narratives about love, hope, morality, free will , justice etc that you are in fact not an atheist, rather a religious, spiritual person who is in denial about god, since denial results from logical inconsistency.
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. +x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc Depends on what you mean by "driven by". What I can name is many successful countries where the majority of the population sees itself as religious I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. Secularists are in the minority here, and in every successful modern country in the world, yet they feel its the opposite. Worse they would- if they could- remove the freedom of religion in our Constitution. Ok, so there is absolutely none in the world. Got it. As for those stats, as if 6/10 Aussies are 'religious'. Laughable. That's why churches across the country are empty. Also, various ethnic groups across the world, ones that have had zero communication with each other have shared principles - it really has bugger all to do with one person's religion giving everyone a doctrine. Religion in the United States- Protestantism (34%)
- Catholicism (23%)
- Non-specific Christian (11%)
- Mormonism (2%)
- Judaism (2%)
- Other religions (6%)
- Unaffiliated with organized forms of religion (21%)
- No answer (1%)
As the Yanks like to say "there are no atheists in a foxhole" they should know as they happily spread the word of God to all the "heathens" around the world.... " I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," I'm not sure if you're being facetious but in case you're not. (You'd know all of this anyway.) Culturally Americans are far more religious than most western countries. Admitting you're an atheist in America is akin to admitting you're a child molester. If you think I'm joking. https://time.com/109050/a-nation-of-growing-atheists-still-wouldnt-trust-one-to-run-the-country/Or this one. Biggest negative for a politician is, you guessed it, declaring themselves an atheist. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/05/19/for-2016-hopefuls-washington-experience-could-do-more-harm-than-good/https://www.learnreligions.com/atheists-trusted-less-than-rapists-248477It's not surprising the average American would profess to be religious. You dont have to believe the world was created 6000 years ago and some Jewish dude walked on water t o find comfort in the fact that the universe isnt just some cold dark random place and being a decent, empathetic person doesnt make you an evolutionary loser but a contributor to a better experience for your fellow man. ... There's sound evolutionary reasons for the develop of religious beliefs. It's also not surprising that people seek a deeper meaning for their existence. None at all. But. I'm OK with the universe being a cold, unthinking, random place where we happen to exist. That's fine by me. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to know who I am or explain it. Our closest relatives in the primate world dont shun members of their species when they murder their own children or murder. They dont show remorse or guilt. They just eat, shit and breed and EVERY action revolves around doing that as efficiently and successfully as possible. @Mono. Sorry mate I meant to say this before. This was what people used to think. Much like how they used to say dogs don't have emotions. Anyone that owns a dog knows that they experience emotion. Pinched this from online. So rather than paraphrase it I'll cut and paste it. It does make you think though. All through history people have thought humanity exists apart from the animal kingdom. It's why we offer them so little regard. It's also why we see ourselves as having a higher purpose. But what if animals had morals? They've developed these morals without religion. Wouldn't that off some proof that morals existed outside of religion? The articles are hyperlinked. Maybe we're not as special as we think. Primates are an order of mammals that include humans, apes, monkeys, and lemurs. The question of whether they exhibit morality is not easy to answer, as different researchers may have different criteria for defining morality. However, some studies have suggested that certain primates can display moral emotions, such as empathy, compassion, grief, outrage, and fairness12Some examples of primate behaviours that may indicate moral sensibility are:
These are just some of the many examples of primates exhibiting moral emotions. However, not all researchers agree that these behaviors constitute true morality, and some may argue that they are based on instinct, social learning, or self-interest. Therefore, the question of primate morality remains a fascinating and controversial topic6
5 Animals With a Moral Compass | Animal Emotions | Live Science
Do Animas Know Right From Wrong? | Live Science
Debatable whether they have or not and it isnt just some sort of Pavlovian response to their owner. All "evidence" to the contrary is theoretical... anyway, wont labour the point, It's interesting though. Clearly animals don't have religion and yet exhibit moral behaviours. There's plenty of evidence of dolphins helping humans from being attacked from sharks and to help them from drowning. Hell there's a clip where a whale picks up a dropped cell phone and returns it and that's not from some zoo. https://youtube.com/shorts/4Jm0EX2yEcc?si=Ww3MnJ_CgVDF1oVAWhat's their motivation? It's convenient to dismiss it because it adds another complication to humans thinking they're special. How do you know these behaviours are moral and not just impulses driven by biological triggers like wanting to protect a weaker species or beleiveng a mobile phone was a bit of food to be retrieved? How can you attest to animals motivation when there is no comminicable way of knowung why animals do what they do.... Your (lower case) bible thumping mate may very well put it down to a benevolent God working his miracle through his creation .... how do we know one way or another.If it was a prevalent occurrence then i guess we can make an educated assumption however there have been thousands more cases of dolphins curiously engaging with humans and then just ignoring us all together or worse:. https://medium.com/@darkenergyarticles/the-dark-side-of-dolphins-they-kidnap-rape-and-murder-other-dolphins-and-humans-393b4ab9ce69I chose to not believe animals have emotional intelligence NOT because of some sort of moral dominion over them but because I want to be able to keep enjoying bacon and juicy juicy rib-eye ... hahahahahahahah Well that's why they run experiments. I'm telling you right now this is just the beginning. (Pigs are smarter than dogs. I have very uncomfortable feelings about pigs locked up in cages.) One bite on a mobile phone would tell you it wasn't food and they would have dropped it. They're not stupid. Regards your wayward dolphins. Humans rape and murder other humans that doesn't mean the species doesn't have feelings of empathy or morals. The fact dolphins rape and murder is proof of nothing except that they're capable of rape and murder. Empathy and the brain (parentingscience.com)Empathy in nonhuman animals
In one experiment, 15 rhesus monkeys were trained to get food by pulling chains. Monkeys quickly learned that one chain delivered twice as much food than the other. But then the rules changed: If a monkey pulled the chain associated with the bigger reward, another “bystander” monkey received an electric shock.
After seeing their conspecific get a shock, 10 of the monkeys switched their preferences to the chain associated with the lesser food reward. Two other monkeys stopped pulling either chain—preferring to starve rather than see another monkey in pain (Masserman et al 1964). Four legs good, two legs better tavarich.... hahahahahahahah what a fascinating rabbit-hole this conversation has taken by the way...
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xHere's an interesting study that won't surprise non-believers. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19955414/Paper linked from this article. (Excerpt below.) https://theconversation.com/religion-does-not-determine-your-morality-97895Experimental evidence suggests that people’s opinion of what God thinks is right and wrong tracks what they believe is right and wrong, not the other way around.
Social psychologist Nicholas Epley and his colleagues surveyed religious believers about their moral beliefs and the moral beliefs of God. Not surprisingly, what people thought was right and wrong matched up pretty well with what they felt God’s morality was like.
Then Epley and his fellow researchers attempted to manipulate their participants’ moral beliefs with persuasive essays. If convinced, their moral opinion should then be different from God’s, right?
Wrong. When respondents were asked again what God thought, people reported that God agreed with their new opinion!
Therefore, people didn’t come to believe that God is wrong, they just updated their opinion on what God thinks.
When you change someone’s moral beliefs, you also change their opinion on what God thinks. Yet most surveyed still clung to the illusion that they got their moral compass from what they think God believes is right and wrong. "manipulate" and "persuasive" says it all really Muz.... That's rather dismissive. The paper shows people align what they take out of the bible based on their internal moral compass. And that's easily demonstrable. Even in this thread you've got a bloke here that thinks the earth is 6000 years old, others that think it's not, other christians that think gays can marry, others that think not, evangelicals in America thinking you shouldn't have sex before marriage, people here thinking it's OK, abortion bad, abortion Ok. And where did they get all those ideas? Spoiler alert: The bible. Well they can't all be right. So yeah people take out of the bible what they want to believe. Which is my overarching point. IE they choose their morals. They're not set down from on high at all unless you're telling me that pre bible people didn't know it wasn't the done thing to kill someone. (Excluding wars and conflict.) None of this is surprising. What the paper is showing is how easily the bible can be shifted to fit their new perception. Not at all, its is a fairly straight forward assumption from EVERY able minded person that the bible can be manipulated and used to persuade weak minded people to shift their perceptions... I have absolutely NO point of disagreement on this... Its what i have been saying all along. I dont claim human morals come from a book, or a preaching or a religious text of any kind... Pre Bible people did indeed know it is ethically wrong to take another humans life, as it is to take someone else property or whatever.... point is that this is NOT an inherently human trait, we are biologically compelled to practice "dog eat dog" and at one stage of our evolution, whether through society or fear of supernatural judgement a set of moral rules wer imposed... Yes these rules have changed or been deflected or have had religion cloud their usage but fact is.... its not nature that stops us from killing our rivals its something else... what that is is the question..
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]I find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. +x+x+x+xI find it funny that these religious types demand a way of thinking from before the dark ages, but equally want to enjoy the trappings of modern thinking - provided by the same scientists and scientific thinking they don’t believe on most issues.
Realistically they should go and bunk in with the taliban as they align more with their outlook that a modern society does. I find it equally funny these secularist types demand a way of their Godless way of thinking, but equally want to enjoy living in societies founded on religious principles, provided by the same ethics and laws they don't believe in all cases. Realistically they should go and bunk in with the North Koreans and Venezualans. Can you name one country that is driven by religion that you'd like to model on, or is a success story? I can name many that have separation of government and religion or have completely turned their backs on religion and religious principles to go on to great things of the current crop you have Afghanistan, Iran, Vatican City, Yemen, Saudi Arabia etc Depends on what you mean by "driven by". What I can name is many successful countries where the majority of the population sees itself as religious I'll start with Australia. Your home. Despite being one of the most secular Western countries in the world, the majority are still religious @ 61%. In the UK its 63%. France 72%. Germany 61%. US 70%. Sweden 70%. Denmark >72%. Norway 75%. I could go on. Secularists are in the minority here, and in every successful modern country in the world, yet they feel its the opposite. Worse they would- if they could- remove the freedom of religion in our Constitution. Ok, so there is absolutely none in the world. Got it. As for those stats, as if 6/10 Aussies are 'religious'. Laughable. That's why churches across the country are empty. Also, various ethnic groups across the world, ones that have had zero communication with each other have shared principles - it really has bugger all to do with one person's religion giving everyone a doctrine. - Protestantism (34%)
- Catholicism (23%)
- Non-specific Christian (11%)
- Mormonism (2%)
- Judaism (2%)
- Other religions (6%)
- Unaffiliated with organized forms of religion (21%)
- No answer (1%)
As the Yanks like to say "there are no atheists in a foxhole" they should know as they happily spread the word of God to all the "heathens" around the world.... " I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all," I'm not sure if you're being facetious but in case you're not. (You'd know all of this anyway.) Culturally Americans are far more religious than most western countries. Admitting you're an atheist in America is akin to admitting you're a child molester. If you think I'm joking. https://time.com/109050/a-nation-of-growing-atheists-still-wouldnt-trust-one-to-run-the-country/Or this one. Biggest negative for a politician is, you guessed it, declaring themselves an atheist. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/05/19/for-2016-hopefuls-washington-experience-could-do-more-harm-than-good/https://www.learnreligions.com/atheists-trusted-less-than-rapists-248477It's not surprising the average American would profess to be religious. You dont have to believe the world was created 6000 years ago and some Jewish dude walked on water t o find comfort in the fact that the universe isnt just some cold dark random place and being a decent, empathetic person doesnt make you an evolutionary loser but a contributor to a better experience for your fellow man. ... I'm OK with the universe being a cold, unthinking, random place where we happen to exist. That's fine by me. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to know who I am or explain it. Are you OK with terrorism, murder, child molesters, genocide and rape? That is the logical extension of a cold, unthinking, random universe, everything within it is also cold, unthinking and random, including life, morality, purpose. Sure there is the performance theater of being outwardly angry, for the purpose of fitting in socially and maximizing your reproductive potential, but in your quieter, private moments do you engage the higher functioning part of your brain and admit to yourself that it's all just bullshit? I'm ok with atheists, but I noticed many atheists are reluctant to be atheists when it comes to their own internal dialogue about themselves, morality, existence and love, and choose to indulge in religious superstition in a clumsy foolhardy attempt to deny nihilsm. Being a true atheist isn't just about not believing in god and thinking you will rot when you die, that's easy that part, the hard, brave part is admitting everything about everything is bullshit. My personally philosophy is a mixture of try and treat everyone like you'd like to be treated, try and help some people along the way if you can and leave the world a slightly better place than when you entered it. That's it. Really the best you can really hope for is to be remembered fondly. This is santa clause for atheists lol As an atheist the only personal philosophy you can honestly subscribe to is “ everything including my life, everything and everyone in it is random, involuntary and meaningless” Sure you can confect some silly beliefs about helping others and being remembered fondly blah blah, but isn’t that what you argue the religious people do, confect beliefs to find meaning and comfort in the cold, dark universe? How do you confront someone whose personal philosophy is to rape as many women as possible? As a true atheist you would have to concede that person isn’t morally wrong or evil since those are pseudo religious terms and that the rapist is in fact equal to you. In fact from an evolutionary perspective may even be more efficient at reproducing, so why not give them a high five rather than a jail sentence? Denying god is easy, you can live life the way you see fit and when you die you become worm food. No harm done. The hard part is accepting the consequences that come with denying god, admitting there is no good/evil, justice, free will, love, human rights, morality or meaning in anything, and then living your life according to those precepts. Instead atheists cop out and do what you would argue religious people do, indulge in magical thinking to cope and try to make sense of things. I don't need religion to have morals. Morals have evolved over time. (And will further evolve.) That's why it used to be ok to keep slaves, kill gays and belt your wife up in biblical times and now it's not. Even though the bible says those things are ok. (According to Enzo I'm taking these bits out of context. Uh huh.) As an atheist why would I high-five a murderer when I know that it's wrong. My non-belief in a god doesn't stop me from determining what is and isn't good behaviour. Would I care about someone I love being killed? Yes I would. Would I seek punishment? Yes I would. Can I empathise with someone I don't know being murdered through the magic of altruism that evolved hundreds of thousands of years ago in sub-Saharan Africa? Yes I would. Would I hope that they are punished? Yes I would. I don't know why you keep implying we're copping out by not believing in god. I don't need a belief in the supernatural to try and be a good person. (Good being relative to what societal expectations are today. Google up the origins of 'exposure' with regards to children for an eye opener on what used to be acceptable. You're missing my point. You don't need religion to have morals, but if you're an honest atheist who believes everything about the universe is accidental, random and meaningless, then by logical extension so is everything within the universe, including life, love and especially morals.
(A) You can't on one hand argue that the universe, filled with trillions of stars and planets in all its glory and splendour is meaningless, but on the other hand argue that invisible abstract things morality and personal beliefs are important and valuable.
(B) Yet you believe them anyway, so what does this all mean? It means, like you accuse religious people of, you also indulge in fantasy thinking to create an illusion of meaning, value and purpose in your life. The only difference is your illusion is logically inconsistent.
Morals aren't real, they are just corny human brain farts that simple people pathetically adhere to. Things like murder, rape aren't really bad, because notions of bad and evil are pseudo bullshit religious terms others bind us in to exploit and subjugate us. (C) You don't really love your children, you are just programmed by evolution to think you love them to ensure the survival of the species. (D) There is no such thing as free will, we are simply robots existing to in endless involuntary flow of atoms and molecules. This is logically consistent atheism.
(A) Why not? We randomly evolved. Randomly evolved feelings. And here we are. They're important to me because I'm a product of evolution. (B) I never said there was a meaning to life. I offered you my personal philosophy. What's the alternative? I don't want to rape and murder people. (C) This is probably true. That doesn't make those feelings not real. (D) This is a very interesting philosophical question. I've swung between thinking there is and isn't free will. I'm undecided at the moment. I'm trying to understand your point. Maybe I've missed it again. We've evolved to place value on things that we call morality due to altruism and other random things that were good for the group. Are morals meaningless? Well it depends on who you ask. What you think is normal and fine is disgusting and untenable by another group of humans. (Say gay marriage or female circumcision.) The love for my kids is probably (well actually not probable) a chemical reaction (dopamine levels are raised when you have children) that we evolved to care after our children. It is, after all, why they look so cute and smell great when they're young. So we look after them. Because sure as shit they'd die if they weren't cared for. Hormones and chemicals are probably doing the heavy lifting for sure. I've explained to you why I think morality is important. (We've evolved to care about other people for the good of the group and the propagation of the species. What more can I say? I don't need religion to tell me I'm upset because someone killed my kid or someone within my social group or further afield.) I've provided links that other animals display, what we would call, morality within their social groups. It appears that humans aren't special in this way. (But it is a given that in the main animals don't care at all. A fish thinks nothing when it eats another fish for example.) You cling to the supernatural if you want. I'm Ok over here. I'm off to give plasma this morning for the 5th time this year. I know a godless heathen shouldn't really care about others but maybe that's the beauty of being an unthinking robotic automaton. (I don't have to think about these things too hard.) I’m not saying that you have to be religious to be happy or have morals, (A) I’m explaining to you that as an atheist your moral framework and beliefs about anything and everything is an illusion. It carries no real substance or objective meaning, so when you say things like “xyz is important to me” what you’re really saying “existence is random and meaningless, and that frightens me so I will confect some beliefs about morality, love, purpose etc so that now my life has meaning and I can enjoy it”.So thats my point, that you indulge in fantasy thinking to craft an internalised narrative that life has meaning, purpose and value, and this is logically inconsistent with the atheistic worldview the universe no has meaning, purpose or value. Now you might say that evolution made you that way, but its also true that evolution made billions of people believe in god, yet YOU engaged the higher functioning logical part of your brain to deny god. (B) So taking things further why dont you engage the same part of your brain to deny the internalised narrative about meaning, purpose and value thats been force fed to you since birth? That’s the logical consequence of atheism, not only to deny god but to deny ALL illogical beliefs that humans cling too to provide meaning and hope where apparently none exists. (C) So I would argue that if you continue to buy into narratives about love, hope, morality, free will , justice etc that you are in fact not an atheist, rather a religious, spiritual person who is in denial about god, since denial results from logical inconsistency. With no sense of irony you wrote that. (A) Swap in 'believer' for 'atheist' and I don't need to change a single word of what you wrote. (Particularly the bit about 'frightens'.) Back at ya. (B) I have. I explained that all to you before. I have questioned it and taken it to the nth degree. Life is meaningless. That's the difference though. You think that because I think life is meaningless its (a) not worth living or (b) I should go out and rape and murder people. I'm ok with life being meaningless. It seems you're the one that can't handle it. I'm agreeing with you. In 150 years time rusty not a single person will know you've even walked on the earth. You'll be a footnote in some photo album stuffed in the garage. (C) Hahahaha. No. But you keep telling yourself that if that helps you tell me what I think.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world ( than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations I'm sorry you're just plain wrong. I don't know why you persist in this delusion that atheism is the dominant position of our world. Its not. 85% of the world believes in a religion of some description. The facts are the facts: the world including Eastern Europe and over a dozen Soviet republics experimented with Godless societies as recent as the late 20th century and they all turned to shit. Those that remain are also shit.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xHere's an interesting study that won't surprise non-believers. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19955414/Paper linked from this article. (Excerpt below.) https://theconversation.com/religion-does-not-determine-your-morality-97895Experimental evidence suggests that people’s opinion of what God thinks is right and wrong tracks what they believe is right and wrong, not the other way around.
Social psychologist Nicholas Epley and his colleagues surveyed religious believers about their moral beliefs and the moral beliefs of God. Not surprisingly, what people thought was right and wrong matched up pretty well with what they felt God’s morality was like.
Then Epley and his fellow researchers attempted to manipulate their participants’ moral beliefs with persuasive essays. If convinced, their moral opinion should then be different from God’s, right?
Wrong. When respondents were asked again what God thought, people reported that God agreed with their new opinion!
Therefore, people didn’t come to believe that God is wrong, they just updated their opinion on what God thinks.
When you change someone’s moral beliefs, you also change their opinion on what God thinks. Yet most surveyed still clung to the illusion that they got their moral compass from what they think God believes is right and wrong. "manipulate" and "persuasive" says it all really Muz.... That's rather dismissive. The paper shows people align what they take out of the bible based on their internal moral compass. And that's easily demonstrable. Even in this thread you've got a bloke here that thinks the earth is 6000 years old, others that think it's not, other christians that think gays can marry, others that think not, evangelicals in America thinking you shouldn't have sex before marriage, people here thinking it's OK, abortion bad, abortion Ok. And where did they get all those ideas? Spoiler alert: The bible. Well they can't all be right. So yeah people take out of the bible what they want to believe. Which is my overarching point. IE they choose their morals. They're not set down from on high at all unless you're telling me that pre bible people didn't know it wasn't the done thing to kill someone. (Excluding wars and conflict.) None of this is surprising. What the paper is showing is how easily the bible can be shifted to fit their new perception. Not at all, its is a fairly straight forward assumption from EVERY able minded person that the bible can be manipulated and used to persuade weak minded people to shift their perceptions... I have absolutely NO point of disagreement on this... Its what i have been saying all along. I dont claim human morals come from a book, or a preaching or a religious text of any kind... Pre Bible people did indeed know it is ethically wrong to take another humans life, as it is to take someone else property or whatever.... point is that this is NOT an inherently human trait, we are biologically compelled to practice "dog eat dog" and at one stage of our evolution, whether through society or fear of supernatural judgement a set of moral rules wer imposed... Yes these rules have changed or been deflected or have had religion cloud their usage but fact is.... its not nature that stops us from killing our rivals its something else... what that is is the question.. You mightn't, others are very much in disagreement. Empathy, compassion and altruism because that's what was best for the group. We've evolved these traits. Society reflects these traits. Those traits have changed over time. It's that simple. Yes it can be dog eat dog but humans, compared to animals, are no match for animals when it comes to every physical characteristic they have except our brains and our ability to organise ourselves into groups. A single person, acting alone, is never taking down a woolly mammoth.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xNearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" Mate we're arguing whether the bible was foundational for the morals we have today. I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world ( than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations I'm sorry you're just plain wrong. I don't know why you persist in this delusion that atheism is the dominant position of our world. Its not. 85% of the world believes in a religion of some description. The facts are the facts: the world including Eastern Europe and over a dozen Soviet republics experimented with Godless societies as recent as the late 20th century and they all turned to shit. Those that remain are also shit. Yeah it's only been socially acceptable to be an atheist in Australia for a decade or two and we're already at 40% no religion. Not bad progress given the multi-millenia head start religion had. Must irk you to see so many ungrateful heathens declaring themselves 'no religion'. Other countries are tracking along the same path either ahead or behind us. We are, slowly but surely, growing out of a old superstitions.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world (than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations You're right about that. Just about every western country operates independently of religion these days. (Separation of Church and state is in nearly every constitution.) There are a few hangovers of course like not being able to get an abortion, not having euthanasia and not being able to marry whoever the hell you want. But in the main if religion disappeared from Australia tomorrow the 1 or 2% of people THAT ATTEND church might miss it. No one else would. I'll tell you who goes to church in my town. Refugees and Phillipinos. I know because I see them when I drop mum off. If it wasn't for them they'd be shutting up shop. I havent been to church (apart from weddings/funerals and the like) for over 20 years yet still believe in God, whats your point? That organised religion is becoming less popular as social media and gender fluidity now fills our lives with more meaningful pursuits???? I dont get the relevance of church attendance? To clarify I'm saying that religion and a belief in the supernatural are not necessary to the running of a country. If the church disappeared tomorrow hardly anyone would bat an eyelid. I mean you don't go nor do 98% of the Australian population. Enzo is making a big deal out of the fact that every country is religious. I'm saying they're religious in name only. 'No religion' recently became the second biggest category in the census and it's trending up. I think a lot of people would say they're religious that aren't in the slightest, save for saying, they believe in god. God and/or religion plays no part in their life. Virtually none. It's like calling yourself an atheist. A lot of people don't have the guts to say they are. But reword the question and then it's 39% 'no religious affiliation'. And it's trending up. It may not break 50% next census but probably will the one after. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/religious-affiliation-australia Yes but have you considered your place from where you make these observations? You live in Australia. Its also one of the if not THE most secular places on the planet within which you are a white middle class first generation atheist. Australia is diverse. You don't know anyone but the circle you move in. You don't know what part God or religion plays in everyone else's lives-that's why we have a census. Even if you did Australia is a mere 0.3% of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xNearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" Mate we're arguing whether the bible was foundational for the morals we have today. I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. Raking over old coals here but as explained 10 times before if 2 different christians hold 2 opposite views (A & B) about the same subject based on their take on what the bible says then they can't, to use a rustyism, by logical extension, be both right. So; In Society 1 they choose to believe view A is correct and make laws around that. In Society 2 they choose to believe view B is correct and make laws around that. So, by logical extension, (thanks rus) they've both chosen what to believe based on the bible. In other words they've cherry-picked what they want out of it. Thanks secular humanists that called themselves christians back in the day that crafted western civilisation. Big ups to you.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world (than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations You're right about that. Just about every western country operates independently of religion these days. (Separation of Church and state is in nearly every constitution.) There are a few hangovers of course like not being able to get an abortion, not having euthanasia and not being able to marry whoever the hell you want. But in the main if religion disappeared from Australia tomorrow the 1 or 2% of people THAT ATTEND church might miss it. No one else would. I'll tell you who goes to church in my town. Refugees and Phillipinos. I know because I see them when I drop mum off. If it wasn't for them they'd be shutting up shop. I havent been to church (apart from weddings/funerals and the like) for over 20 years yet still believe in God, whats your point? That organised religion is becoming less popular as social media and gender fluidity now fills our lives with more meaningful pursuits???? I dont get the relevance of church attendance? To clarify I'm saying that religion and a belief in the supernatural are not necessary to the running of a country. If the church disappeared tomorrow hardly anyone would bat an eyelid. I mean you don't go nor do 98% of the Australian population. Enzo is making a big deal out of the fact that every country is religious. I'm saying they're religious in name only. 'No religion' recently became the second biggest category in the census and it's trending up. I think a lot of people would say they're religious that aren't in the slightest, save for saying, they believe in god. God and/or religion plays no part in their life. Virtually none. It's like calling yourself an atheist. A lot of people don't have the guts to say they are. But reword the question and then it's 39% 'no religious affiliation'. And it's trending up. It may not break 50% next census but probably will the one after. https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/religious-affiliation-australia Yes but have you considered your place from where you make these observations? You live in Australia. Its also one of the if not THE most secular places on the planet within which you are a white middle class first generation atheist. Australia is diverse. You don't know anyone but the circle you move in. You don't know what part God or religion plays in everyone else's lives-that's why we have a census. Even if you did Australia is a mere 0.3% of the world. Yeah I agree with you. The world is religious. It had a multi-millenia head start. You can't deny that Christianity as a belief system is shrinking. (Islam is increasing due to their high birth rates but I expect that to taper off and trend down in the future.) Think about the consequences of being an atheist in the middle east. They literally, literally can put you to death for not being a believer.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world ( than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations I'm sorry you're just plain wrong. I don't know why you persist in this delusion that atheism is the dominant position of our world. Its not. 85% of the world believes in a religion of some description. The facts are the facts: the world including Eastern Europe and over a dozen Soviet republics experimented with Godless societies as recent as the late 20th century and they all turned to shit. Those that remain are also shit. Yeah it's only been socially acceptable to be an atheist in Australia for a decade or two and we're already at 40% no religion. Not bad progress given the multi-millenia head start religion had. Must irk you to see so many ungrateful heathens declaring themselves 'no religion'. Other countries are tracking along the same path either ahead or behind us. We are, slowly but surely, growing out of a old superstitions. Well here's the thing. Australia's population growth is under-pinned by immigration-only 28% of immigrants have no religious affiliation. Source ABS.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xMorality or ethics pre-date religion. It's not just something religion came up with...various civilisations had self beliefs and social constructs to maintain a positive community If so I can't think of one that at its core didn't have a religion as the foundation for it all. Can you name one? Of course you can't think of one. Why the hell should I waste my time giving you a lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity? There are many books (and thesis') dedicated to the subject. Feel free to go and open one. The burden of proof rest with the person making the claim. Also you weren't asked to provide a "lesson on how humanity evolved before and without christianity". You were asked to support your claim by naming ONE Godless successful society. The fact both you and Muz have refused to do that implies you can't name one. Well this is impossible because you seem to think that every society except for North Korea and China are god-fearing good christian folk, so if anyone pointed to the number of modern societies who've weeded out the luddites you'd still claim they are christian societes. And tbf we'd have even more less religious societies in the world ( than the few that even remian) if the various churches around the world were not forcing their ludicrous 'values' on populations I'm sorry you're just plain wrong. I don't know why you persist in this delusion that atheism is the dominant position of our world. Its not. 85% of the world believes in a religion of some description. The facts are the facts: the world including Eastern Europe and over a dozen Soviet republics experimented with Godless societies as recent as the late 20th century and they all turned to shit. Those that remain are also shit. Yeah it's only been socially acceptable to be an atheist in Australia for a decade or two and we're already at 40% no religion. Not bad progress given the multi-millenia head start religion had. Must irk you to see so many ungrateful heathens declaring themselves 'no religion'. Other countries are tracking along the same path either ahead or behind us. We are, slowly but surely, growing out of a old superstitions. Well here's the thing. Australia's population growth is under-pinned by immigration-only 28% of immigrants have no religious affiliation. Source ABS. Sure but they're, in the main coming from, as you just said, countries where religion is a thing. They'll get here and after a generation or two, after mixing with heathen Australians, drop all that. (Mostly.)
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xNearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" Mate we're arguing whether the bible was foundational for the morals we have today. I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. That's fine except they impose their values on us. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xNearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" Mate we're arguing whether the bible was foundational for the morals we have today. I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. That's fine except they impose their values on us.The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing?
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" . I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing? Are we forcing people to have an abortion, an injection or have a gay marriage? But go on. In what respect are we forcing our values on them?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" . I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing? Are we forcing people to have an abortion, an injection or have a gay marriage? But go on. In what respect are we forcing our values on them? Teaching children nonsense gender and identity theories in public schools. Forcing religious institutions to employ people who are opposed to the founding principles of the institution.
|
|
|
|
|
Enzo Bearzot
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xNearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" Mate we're arguing whether the bible was foundational for the morals we have today. I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. That's fine except they impose their values on us. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated.If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. That's actually not true: Australia's constitution does not have a separation of church and state. The High Court confirmed it in 1981.
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" . I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing? Are we forcing people to have an abortion, an injection or have a gay marriage? But go on. In what respect are we forcing our values on them? Teaching children nonsense gender and identity theories in public schools. Forcing religious institutions to employ people who are opposed to the founding principles of the institution. As someone with two children in an area you'd consider the schools pinko, communist lefty latte sippers, and also as someone who coaches kids in the area so I have access to parents and kids from many different schools. I have never heard of this except when Skynews is pushing it to you late at night. It just doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
tsf I can't agree entirely there mate........ My Sydney region is a mix of them all - be it capitilists/socialists/tree hugging greens you name it. My eldest just finished HS and its been discussed in class start of Yr9 onwards, this is a mid size private catholic college. My wife works in a Gov high school and the same applies - obviously throw in indigenous topics even more today. Its very Gov driven and politics have become ott the last 10/15yrs incl topic/questions my daughter couldn't believe asking all in class not long ago about their home life and how do they rate or describe your parents relationship/behaviour. Glad my daughter said, none of their business. Pinch yourself it stays that way in your pinko area but its damn surprising.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
Monoethnic Social Club
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 11K,
Visits: 0
|
+xtsf I can't agree entirely there mate........ My Sydney region is a mix of them all - be it capitilists/socialists/tree hugging greens you name it. My eldest just finished HS and its been discussed in class start of Yr9 onwards, this is a mid size private catholic college. My wife works in a Gov high school and the same applies - obviously throw in indigenous topics even more today. Its very Gov driven and politics have become ott the last 10/15yrs incl topic/questions m y daughter couldn't believe asking all in class not long ago about their home life and how do they rate or describe your parents relationship/behaviour.Glad my daughter said, none of their business. Pinch yourself it stays that way in your pinko area but its damn surprising. Jesus Christ.... Best response from your daughter though mate, I have discussed this with both my kids, even though they are young, only thing I drummed into them is that what ever opinions the heard at school, from friends, online or whatever .... they need to bring it home so we can talk about it.... and NEVER, EVER, talk about the family or our own opinions to anyone online or outside of the house... world is a scary polarising place these days.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" . I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing? Are we forcing people to have an abortion, an injection or have a gay marriage? But go on. In what respect are we forcing our values on them? Teaching children nonsense gender and identity theories in public schools. Forcing religious institutions to employ people who are opposed to the founding principles of the institution. As someone with two children in an area you'd consider the schools pinko, communist lefty latte sippers, and also as someone who coaches kids in the area so I have access to parents and kids from many different schools. I have never heard of this except when Skynews is pushing it to you late at night. It just doesn't exist. Yep You've got issues around literal life and death and human rights that are/were being impinged on and then you've got blokes upset that a teacher is saying some boys may think they're girls etc.. Of all the silly things to get your knickers in a knot over.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xtsf I can't agree entirely there mate........ My Sydney region is a mix of them all - be it capitilists/socialists/tree hugging greens you name it. My eldest just finished HS and its been discussed in class start of Yr9 onwards, this is a mid size private catholic college. My wife works in a Gov high school and the same applies - obviously throw in indigenous topics even more today. Its very Gov driven and politics have become ott the last 10/15yrs incl topic/questions my daughter couldn't believe asking all in class not long ago about their home life and how do they rate or describe your parents relationship/behaviour. Glad my daughter said, none of their business. Pinch yourself it stays that way in your pinko area but its damn surprising. And?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Nearly all morals we hold today are found in the Bible.But lets take your point that ethics evolve by way of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective, what exactly does homosexuality offer that makes it ethical? (FWY i don't believe in capital punishment for homosexuality) And thousands that aren't. What does homosexuality offer from a evolutionary perspective? I'd say none but I'm not an expert. I will say though I'm aware of homosexuality in other animals, including one of the smartest mammals, like the dolphin. It's good you don't believe homosexuals should be put to death. Probably a good thing that morals have evolved over time so you think like that now because had you been born 400 or 500 years ago (or now in a Islamic country) you'd think differently. I'm glad we are agreed that morals can change over time. I already said, with regards to scandinavian countries, 'until recent waves of migration'. Predominantly 14th century thinking Moslems. Wait up, isn't Islam a religion too? homosexuality was prosecuted by the Christian religion and later the Moslem one Muz, not ALL religions... Its a flawed argument to lump everything under the one "banner" . I'm saying morals evolve over time. How we (the west) treated homosexuals has evolved over time. IE morals have changed. That's the point. Saying we wouldn't have morals without religion is ridiculous. When Lenin and Stalin banned religion that didn't ipso facto make murder and rape OK. They still had laws. In Australia and the Western world, it is absolutely true. Even the Scandi's have crosses on their national flags. Do morals evolve over time- well that depends on the particular people-there are huge numbers people who believe abortion is amoral, that euthanasia is amoral, that homosexuality is amoral. You can make those things legal, but people who see them as amoral, still see them as amoral, even if legal. They are free to make their choice, they are free to make their choice known, as much as you are to to do the converse. The only reason we don't have euthanasia (different to VAD), why abortion was illegal in every state until recently and gay marriage wasn't a thing was because of religion. I mean fuck right off. Apparently I don't live in a secular country when it comes to things like this even though it's specifically set out in the constitution that church and state are to be separated. If you're religious and you don't want an abortion or an injection to kill you when you're sick and dying then DON'T GET ONE but get the fuck out of my life and leave the rest of us alone. Haha. You don't think secularists do the same thing? Are we forcing people to have an abortion, an injection or have a gay marriage? But go on. In what respect are we forcing our values on them? Teaching children nonsense gender and identity theories in public schools. Forcing religious institutions to employ people who are opposed to the founding principles of the institution. As someone with two children in an area you'd consider the schools pinko, communist lefty latte sippers, and also as someone who coaches kids in the area so I have access to parents and kids from many different schools. I have never heard of this except when Skynews is pushing it to you late at night. It just doesn't exist. Yep You've got issues around literal life and death and human rights that are/were being impinged on and then you've got blokes upset that a teacher is saying some boys may think they're girls etc.. Of all the silly things to get your knickers in a knot over. And the first to cry snowflakes
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
Sorry I meant, first to call everyone snowflakes.
|
|
|
|
|
tsf
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
My old man was complaining about unisex toilets and how it’s a disgrace.
I told him his toilet in his own house is unisex 😂😂😂
these are just non issues. Laughable.
|
|
|
|