Morality argument on The Atheist Experience #795

[Davian]

This could have gone in the E&M forum, but seeing as we have all of these morality-therefore-some-sort-of-god threads, I'll put it here (and not drop it into one of those threads):

-------

"Immediately before the conversation is cut off, [co-host] Harris directs the following statement to [caller] Shane: “You either have a God who sends child rapists to rape children or you have a God who simply watches it and says, ‘When you’re done, I’m going to punish you.' If I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. That’s the difference between me and your God."

Shane begins his response by saying, “First of all, you portray that little girl as someone who’s innocent, she’s just as evil as you.” "

'Atheist Experience' TV Host Shocked By Caller's Statement About Child Rape (VIDEO)

(with a nod to the site rules, a heads up that the article's video excerpt from the broadcast contains a four-letter expletive used by one of the hosts to describe the caller).

If you are watching/listening to the full broadcast, the call begins at about 11m50s, and lasts to the final minute of the show.

 

[Paradoxum]

What if someone is raped before the age of accountability? A baby, for example?

I wonder what the little girl could have done to make it ok to watch her being raped.

There are perhaps ways for Christians to wiggle round the problem, but saying it is ok because a child is evil seems particularly heartless.

 

[Jade Margery]

What if someone is raped before the age of accountability? A baby, for example?

I'm pretty sure that what the caller was going for was the old 'original sin' hat. The girl (boy, baby, what have you) was evil and not innocent just by virtue of being human.

The christian idea of original sin--that every person is born sinful, and only believing/accepting/obeying their version of a god will make that person better when they die--is to me, one of the most disgusting and vile methods of brainwashing and coercion that currently exists in the world. Take a healthy person, convince them they are sick, and then conditionally allow them to have the 'cure' that only you possess. Yup, that's real love right there.

 

[Paradoxum]

I'm pretty sure that what the caller was going for was the old 'original sin' hat. The girl (boy, baby, what have you) was evil and not innocent just by virtue of being human.

The christian idea of original sin--that every person is born sinful, and only believing/accepting/obeying their version of a god will make that person better when they die--is to me, one of the most disgusting and vile methods of brainwashing and coercion that currently exists in the world. Take a healthy person, convince them they are sick, and then conditionally allow them to have the 'cure' that only you possess. Yup, that's real love right there.

I'm not all that familiar with the magical-guilt-from-Adam forms of original sin. The Christianity I grew up in emphasised the fact that all have sinned, so all are guilty. I think many people assumed that young children went to heaven since they were sinless. I'm quite grateful I was brought up in a conservative, yet more love based church.

The idea of inborn guilt seems not only unloving, but also unbiblical and nonsense. I mean, how can you be guilty for something you haven't done? I guess they would say that humans born with a sinful nature. Still, one could have a sinful nature, yet be innocent.

I wonder if anything will defend the magical guilt point of view.

 

[ranunculus]

Believing in original sin causes such cognitive dissonance. In an abortion debate a fetus invariably becomes completely innocent. Presumably because it's too uncomfortable to think about babies in hell.
Original sin sends humans to eternal torment by default, yet babies and children are excempt? If you truly believe that, and you truly believe in everlasting torment, why aren't you killing children and then asking for forgiveness? Your religion allows for such loopholes after all.

Kathy Stuart

She decides, I'm going to murder a child.

Ira Glass

That's right. She's going to murder a child to help herself get into Heaven. And incredibly, Kathy Stuart says this was a common strategy around that time for people who wanted to kill themselves. She came across a case like this and then went looking for others like it. And now she has found around 300, most of them women.

Kathy Stuart

These people don't want to go to Hell. So the option that they choose is to commit a capital crime. Immediately upon committing the crime, they run to the court. They confess what they have done, and they essentially demand their own execution.

Ira Glass

So they demand execution knowing that before they go to the gallows, they will have a chance to confess. And if they're truly repentant, they'll go to Heaven. And why kill a child?

Kathy Stuart

They kill a child because the child is seen as being in a state of innocence. So you might possibly be doing the child a favor, because the child will also go to Heaven. You will go to Heaven. It's kind of a win-win situation. There's a happy ending for all.

this american life

Another testament to how immoral original sin really is.

So when you ask a pro lifer about abortion, well why are you upset? Don't you believe that child is going to go to heaven then? Would you rather it faces eternal torment like the majority of all people who are alive or have ever lived? No response.
It's like they know ending a life is wrong because it's the only one you get, yet they simultaneously believe this life is but a doormat to wipe your feet on before you enter the mansion.

Ok, enough rambling.

That was a great episode of the atheist experience, very entertaining. I loved how Tracie kept asking the question of how the caller can make the moral judgement that god is good while at the same time believing his moral compass is broken. Cognitive dissonance strikes again.

 

[Davian]

I'm not all that familiar with the magical-guilt-from-Adam forms of original sin. The Christianity I grew up in emphasised the fact that all have sinned, so all are guilty. I think many people assumed that young children went to heaven since they were sinless. I'm quite grateful I was brought up in a conservative, yet more love based church.

The idea of inborn guilt seems not only unloving, but also unbiblical and nonsense. I mean, how can you be guilty for something you haven't done? I guess they would say that humans born with a sinful nature. Still, one could have a sinful nature, yet be innocent.

I wonder if anything will defend the magical guilt point of view.

I see no one jumped in to defend the caller on this show. I am guessing, if they did, it would be a lame "the caller was not a true Christian" type of defence.

 

[Paradoxum]

I see no one jumped in to defend the caller on this show. I am guessing, if they did, it would be a lame "the caller was not a true Christian" type of defence.

I think many Christians might agree with him, or come close to what he said.

 

[seeking Christ]

What if someone is raped before the age of accountability? A baby, for example?

I wonder what the little girl could have done to make it ok to watch her being raped.

There are perhaps ways for Christians to wiggle round the problem, but saying it is ok because a child is evil seems particularly heartless.

Yes, but I'll take it one step further. Its not ok no matter what. I think that should be obvious. What is equally obvious is God doesn't strike us dead with a lightning bolt every time we make a mistake, which would be a very good thing for every last one of us, so please don't be so quick to forget that.

 

[Davian]

Yes, but I'll take it one step further. Its not ok no matter what. I think that should be obvious.

It was not obvious to that Christian caller. Subjective morals, anyone?

What is equally obvious is God doesn't strike us dead with a lightning bolt every time we make a mistake, which would be a very good thing for every last one of us, so please don't be so quick to forget that.

It is obvious to me that God does not strike anyone down, as by any objective measure he is a fictional character in a book.

If a caring god did exist, I would like to think that it could make an effort to interfere with child rapists, prior to them committing their 'mistakes'.

 

[seeking Christ]

If a caring god did exist, I would like to think that it could make an effort to interfere with child rapists, prior to them committing their 'mistakes'.

Good. Then what are you willing to do about it? This is how God works.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Good. Then what are you willing to do about it? This is how God works.

I'd be willing to do whatever is required to stop a child rapist....

If your God exists and is all powerful, it is demonstrable the same can not be said for your God, as Child rape occurs and he would by definition have the power to stop the rape.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

When Shane ran out of argument he resorted to d-baggery fairly quickly.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Good. Then what are you willing to do about it? This is how God works.

Then there really is no need for your god concept, if we're here to do all the heavy lifting.

 

[seeking Christ]

I'd be willing to do whatever is required to stop a child rapist....

If your God exists and is all powerful, it is demonstrable the same can not be said for your God, as Child rape occurs and he would by definition have the power to stop the rape.

Continually ignoring facts just to provoke a senseless argument is not civil, nor is it reasonable.

I'm glad for your opening statement here anyway, even though you refuse to see my point.

 

[Davian]

It was not obvious to that Christian caller. Subjective morals, anyone?

It is obvious to me that God does not strike anyone down, as by any objective measure he is a fictional character in a book.

If a caring god did exist, I would like to think that it could make an effort to interfere with child rapists, prior to them committing their 'mistakes'.

Could you refrain from editing my post to alter its intent? I find that to be intellectually dishonest. Have we not already had that conversation?

Good. Then what are you willing to do about it? This is how God works.

I am willing to do whatever that is within my capabilities to prevent things such as child rape.

Now, if the world works as if your God is entirely fictional, why believe in it?

Racall that, if your God is fictional, "the problem of evil" is resolved.

 

[seeking Christ]

Then there really is no need for your god concept, if we're here to do all the heavy lifting.

Certainly I see how it seems that way; we are all plagued with this problem and most Christians that are visibly seen engaging in douchebaggery have made that same mistake.

What's your max bench? Does your finger really do the heavy lifting? To it it probably seems so, (silly and impossible allegory I know) but the finger only does its role which is small in the overall motion.

Same concept applies.

A vast bulk of Scripture is devoted to illustrating this for us, including all the miracles. Think of it like a mechanic following a Chilton's manual. Yes, the mechanic applies himself and gets something done. Yes those who published the manual did the same. The car still had to be designed and built for any of it to take place.

 

[seeking Christ]

Could you refrain from editing my post to alter its intent? I find that to be intellectually dishonest. Have we not already had that conversation?

1. the post this is snipped from is unintelligible
2. your complaint is vacuous
3. Steven Tyler's first hit

 

[Davian]

Could you refrain from editing my post to alter its intent? I find that to be intellectually dishonest. Have we not already had that conversation?

I am willing to do whatever that is within my capabilities to prevent things such as child rape.

Now, if the world works as if your God is entirely fictional, why believe in it?

Racall that, if your God is fictional, "the problem of evil" is resolved.

1. the post this is snipped from is unintelligible

Only for those attempting to respond with presuppositional apologetics.

2. your complaint is vacuous

Right on target, then.

3. Steven Tyler's first hit

It *is* you, razeontherock! You old sock!

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Certainly I see how it seems that way; we are all plagued with this problem and most Christians that are visibly seen engaging in douchebaggery have made that same mistake.

What's your max bench? Does your finger really do the heavy lifting? To it it probably seems so, (silly and impossible allegory I know) but the finger only does its role which is small in the overall motion.

Same concept applies.

A vast bulk of Scripture is devoted to illustrating this for us, including all the miracles. Think of it like a mechanic following a Chilton's manual. Yes, the mechanic applies himself and gets something done. Yes those who published the manual did the same. The car still had to be designed and built for any of it to take place.

Now that you mention it, Chilton's manual was written by men, and needs to be continually updated too!

 

[seeking Christ]

Now that you mention it, Chilton's manual was written by men, and needs to be continually updated too!

As do the vehicles they were made for. (The analogy holds here)