Abortion

[SPF]

I never claimed they are wrong; merely that you're misrepresenting what they are saying. I've already answered your question, of course. It's when uniquely-human brainwaves come into existence, which is around five months into the pregnancy. I think Carl Sagan explained it best.

Right, and your position is entirely arbitrary and subjective.

You draw the line at brainwaves, others draw the line at heartbeat, others viability, others birth, others 2nd trimester, others 3rd trimester. Problem is that your position is completely subjective. You may as well throw a dart at a dartboard to pick where you draw the line.

 

[SPF]

For me, it’s really quite simple. As a Christian, I agree with Scripture that all human beings are created in the Image of God and possess inherent moral worth and value.

Our moral worth and value is inherent and not based upon our level of development, dependency, or location of residence.

I, unlike you for some reason, also agree with modern science and the revelation that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. This is science, not philosophy.

Putting those two together the math is simple. All humans at all times after they come into existence are morally valuable.

Therefore, the 98.5% of abortions which are the intentional and purposeful killing of the unborn human for convenience reasons is immoral.

It’s really that simple.

 

[NxNW]

I, unlike you for some reason, also agree with modern science and the revelation that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization. This is science, not philosophy.

Science does not make that claim, and I've already pointed out examples of when this is not true. If you read the Sagan essay, you'll have a better understanding.

 

[SPF]

Science does not make that claim, and I've already pointed out examples of when this is not true. If you read the Sagan essay, you'll have a better understanding.

It does, and your continued decision to ignore the sound science and cited material that I've presented by simply saying, "nope" doesn't lend any credibility to your position.

Your position is completely arbitrary and subjective. Your position is philosophical in nature, and not scientific.

The science is sound and indisputable at this point, you have no basis, no ground to argue against it. You've provided nothing to suggest otherwise except subjective philosophical opinions that do not hold weight to the biological facts that science can plainly see at this point.

You've provided no refutation to the myriad of credible scientific material I've provided.

Sagan remarked:

If you deliberately kill a human being, it's called murder. If you deliberately kill a chimpanzee--biologically, our closest relative, sharing 99.6 percent of our active genes--whatever else it is, it's not murder. To date, murder uniquely applies to killing human beings. Therefore, the question of when personhood (or, if we like, ensoulment) arises is key to the abortion debate.

If you see, he did exactly what I recommended you do a number of pages back. Most educated people in this debate, due to the factual nature of what science has shown us regarding the truth that a new human being comes into existence at fertilization (or almost immediately after for a twin), will shift the argument and attempt to create a distinction between a human being and a human person.

But as I pointed out, this distinction is purely philosophical, and it's also entirely subjective and arbitrary. The reality is that a human beings development takes about 25 years, beginning at fertilization.

At no point during our 25 year development are we not a human being.

The only reason that people attempt to fabricate a difference between a human being and a human person is so they can justify actions against the non-person that we would otherwise consider immoral.

As a Christian, that line of reasoning doesn't work because in Scripture, God is clear that all human beings are created in His Image and possess inherent moral worth and value. I, as a finite, created being do not have the authority on my own to intentionally kill an innocent human being. 98.5% of abortions are performed for non-medical emergencies, aka convenience - and are therefore immoral.

But again, I want to point out that as an atheist, I don't expect you to agree that all human beings are inherently morally valuable. Indeed, in an existence devoid of a Creator, we are no more inherently morally valuable than any other mammals.

 

[NxNW]

Your position is completely arbitrary and subjective. Your position is philosophical in nature, and not scientific. The science is sound and indisputable at this point, you have no basis, no ground to argue against it. You've provided nothing to suggest otherwise except subjective philosophical opinions that do not hold weight to the biological facts that science can plainly see at this point. You've provided no refutation to the myriad of credible scientific material I've provided.

On the contrary, I've pointed out that you're misrepresenting what the science says. I've pointed out that not all life begins at conception, and I've pointed out how the Bible does not even claim that human beings form at conception.

The only reason that people attempt to fabricate a difference between a human being and a human person is so they can justify actions against the non-person that we would otherwise consider immoral.

If the unborn is a human being, it should not have the right to attach itself to another person without permission. Forcing the woman to endure it is the immoral aspect.

But again, I want to point out that as an atheist, I don't expect you to agree that all human beings are inherently morally valuable. Indeed, in an existence devoid of a Creator, we are no more inherently morally valuable than any other mammals.

If God values human beings, he wouldn't let 70% of fertilized eggs miscarry, nor would he have wiped out the vast majority of life on the planet including countless pregnant women. And if God plays by a different set of rules, than morality is not absolute.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Not really as if a creature does not know evil to be able to murder, rape and steal then they also cannot know good to be kind, loving and generous as these are the opposite and give the evil deeds context. So therefore you would be devoid of feelings and understanding of right and wrong.

Neither would being good to people. Everyone would just exist like robots.

You misunderstand. I'm saying an omnipotent god could have created all people with an understanding of what evil would be if they did it, they just (like me in this world) would have no desire at all to do any of those things. People already have imaginations, we can think of all sorts of terrible things without actually doing them. Think of any form of torture. Before it was actually done, it was thought of. If no one has any desire to hurt someone else (again, like me in this world), then that idea of torture would have just remained an idea.

So unless you want to call me a robot in this world, your statement is illogical. And if you do call me a robot, well, I'd rather be a robot.

The point is emotions like anger, jealousy, revenge, greed are what cause people to kill and steal. Without them we would not have those feelings and probably would not have the capacity to over react. But we would be pretty numb and not be able to feel anything.

I have strong feelings but I don't kill, rape or steal. We've been over this.

A person does not just decide to kill one day for no reason (motivation). Uncontrolled anger or jealousy is a symptom of a persons inability to regulate their emotions. An inability to regulate emotions usually stems from developmental problems associated with a child's upbringing such as insecure attachment to caregiver. Even anger has a negative effect on the person with the anger such as stress that can lead to health issues.

I think our emotions are associated with many aspects of our lives. Love is a powerful emotion but there can be a fine line between love and hate which can turn to anger and murder. Jealous and angry partners/friends is the number one reason for most murders. I think if God started to put limits of our feelings we would not be free agents and the unique beings we are with many capabilities that can overcome impossible odds.

Do I have a "limit" on my feelings because I get angry but don't murder, lust but don't rape, and want what others have but don't steal?

If so, then I'm at peace with that. Ask a rape victim if they'd prefer to live in a world where everyone would have the same "limit" on their feelings, or if they'd rather live in a world where rape exists.

Because emotions are connected to all aspects of our sense and lives there would be big implications for us if they were limited. What you are talking about is limiting humans and almost programming them like a robot.

Simple question... am I a robot?

The argument is quite simple.

I know. Odd that no one has ever made a counter to it that wasn't illogical.

You cannot come up with any argument with supporting evidence that God is not all good and that he has created us as we are out of necessity. So though no one can support an argument against the position you present you cannot come up with an argument that proves your position either.

My position doesn't say anything about a god's "goodness". I'm saying that if an omnipotent god exists, it could have created everyone like me, someone who has free will but doesn't murder, rape or steal. But since this world isn't like this, it is the evidence that such a god desires murder, rape and theft more than the elimination of such things. I'm the evidence (along with countless others) that people can have strong emotions but not commit evil acts like murder or rape.

You haven't countered my position in any way.

In fact if someone bothered I think they could do some research to find what the implications would be if a person lost their ability to feel strong emotions and know the difference between good and bad emotions and actions. For example there are people who do not experience emotion and they are said to have a mental disorder that diminishes their ability to be a fully functioning human being.

So you're saying that someone that gets angry but doesn't murder isn't a fully functioning human being? I beg to differ...

 

[stevevw]

You misunderstand. I'm saying an omnipotent god could have created all people with an understanding of what evil would be if they did it, they just (like me in this world) would have no desire at all to do any of those things. People already have imaginations, we can think of all sorts of terrible things without actually doing them. Think of any form of torture. Before it was actually done, it was thought of. If no one has any desire to hurt someone else (again, like me in this world), then that idea of torture would have just remained an idea.

So unless you want to call me a robot in this world, your statement is illogical. And if you do call me a robot, well, I'd rather be a robot.

I have strong feelings but I don't kill, rape or steal. We've been over this.

I am just saying that I think the way we are made is for a reason to be a complete autonomous person. Meddling with desires, emotions and the mind has all sorts of ramifications. A bit like the butterfly effect. We have seen this with how we mess with nature and it has repercussions.

You don't have the desire to kill but potentially you do and that could happen in certain situations like war or self defense. It is the same emotions and mind set just geared to a different emotion of fear and preservation rather than out of anger or revenge. Flip sides of the same coin, Take one side away and you take the coin away. So I don't think we can mess with it at all as it would take away something in us. To be a killer is a complex set of conditions that only an expert would understand.

Do I have a "limit" on my feelings because I get angry but don't murder, lust but don't rape, and want what others have but don't steal?

If so, then I'm at peace with that. Ask a rape victim if they'd prefer to live in a world where everyone would have the same "limit" on their feelings, or if they'd rather live in a world where rape exists.

I know we have been over this and we are probably arguing about details in what goes into making a human and hence making a killer. We both probably don't completely know but I guess further research could help. It would be complex and associated with a range of things like psychology, genetics, even epigentics.

That's the point to make a killer especially a psychopath it takes a range of conditions and damage so to eliminate this out of humans would mean manipulation all the experiences and conditioning a person has including taking out parts of the brain that become damaged that are also associated with other functions (the butterfly effect). It ain't so easy I would imagine. Here is a TedX talk on it Exploring the mind of a killer

Simple question... am I a robot?

I don't think its a simple as just a robot as many of the aspects of why people kill are so interconnected to just being a human and taking that out is also changing and limited other functions we need.

I know. Odd that no one has ever made a counter to it that wasn't illogical.

Your argument is based on a logical fallacy of the unknown. You and I cannot know everything that is involved in why a person kills so any argument that claims something is still speculation. IE Argument from ignorance which asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false. You haven't provided any scientific evidence just speculation and that there is no counter argument.

My position doesn't say anything about a god's "goodness". I'm saying that if an omnipotent god exists, it could have created everyone like me, someone who has free will but doesn't murder, rape or steal. But since this world isn't like this, it is the evidence that such a god desires murder, rape and theft more than the elimination of such things. I'm the evidence (along with countless others) that people can have strong emotions but not commit evil acts like murder or rape.

You haven't countered my position in any way.

Once again an Argument from ignorance. You haven't provided any verifiable evidence either just say so. You would have to know and understand every associated link to those actions in mind, body and emotion which you cannot know or supply evidence for. You just assume this will be the case.

Good people kill for good reason so this is just one of the consequences that would change. There would be thousands to consider. I mentioned one big one above that the parts of the brain that cause someone to kill probably the frontal lobe are also the same parts that are associated with other functions. So taking those will also take the associated functions. They are there for good reason.

So you're saying that someone that gets angry but doesn't murder isn't a fully functioning human being? I beg to differ...

I don't think its as black and white as that. Like I said there is a myriad of interconnected possibilities that would be affected and contribute to why someone does what they do and how life's circumstances and conditions affect that with a ripple effect. I just don't think we can start dissecting a human and take parts out without it affecting a person or a situation in some other way. You are playing God yourself and claiming to know how to pull apart and put a person back together better than God.

All I know what the bible says and it says that God created us in his own image. God cannot sin and is only good so this contradictory notion that God is evil or makes things evil is wrong as far as Gods nature is concerned. The rest I think is hard to work out and we would have to spend a lot of time researching things. Even then there would be aspects associated with how God created us and nature, His divine plan and how it all fits together that we could not know.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I am just saying that I think the way we are made is for a reason to be a complete autonomous person. Meddling with desires, emotions and the mind has all sorts of ramifications. A bit like the butterfly effect. We have seen this with how we mess with nature and it has repercussions.

There's no "messing with nature" involved at all. We're talking about a world in which everyone has the same aversion to murder, rape and theft that I do. Everyone is born this way, like I was born. Unless you're saying that there was some "messing with nature" in my birth?

You don't have the desire to kill but potentially you do and that could happen in certain situations like war or self defense. It is the same emotions and mind set just geared to a different emotion of fear and preservation rather than out of anger or revenge. Flip sides of the same coin, Take one side away and you take the coin away. So I don't think we can mess with it at all as it would take away something in us. To be a killer is a complex set of conditions that only an expert would understand.

You seem to forget that we're talking about a world in which no one wants to harm another person, like I do in this world. So there would never be a situation where I would have a reason to murder someone. No war, no self defense.

I know we have been over this and we are probably arguing about details in what goes into making a human and hence making a killer. We both probably don't completely know but I guess further research could help. It would be complex and associated with a range of things like psychology, genetics, even epigentics.

Am I a human, since I don't want to kill, rape or steal? If I am human, the wouldn't a world of people born like me still equate into a world full of humans?

That's the point to make a killer especially a psychopath it takes a range of conditions and damage so to eliminate this out of humans would mean manipulation all the experiences and conditioning a person has including taking out parts of the brain that become damaged that are also associated with other functions (the butterfly effect). It ain't so easy I would imagine. Here is a TedX talk on it Exploring the mind of a killer

So you're saying that creating a world such that everyone is born without the desire to murder, rape and steal is too difficult for any god? I am remember proposing an omnipotnet god. Couple that with the fact that the percentage of people who murder presumedly isn't terribly high even in this world, and it doesn't seem that impossible for a god to have created a world in which no one wants to murder, rape or steal. I mean, I could take all the people I know who think the idea is abhorrent, and move to an island to create a society where no one is murdered. Does that make me more powerful than a god?

I don't think its a simple as just a robot as many of the aspects of why people kill are so interconnected to just being a human and taking that out is also changing and limited other functions we need.

We're not changing anyone in what I'm proposing, like I keep telling you. We would have all been born with an aversion to murder, rape and theft.

Your argument is based on a logical fallacy of the unknown. You and I cannot know everything that is involved in why a person kills so any argument that claims something is still speculation. IE Argument from ignorance which asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false. You haven't provided any scientific evidence just speculation and that there is no counter argument.

This isn't an argument from ignorance in the slightest. I'm stating observant facts about this world:

A. Murder, rape and robbery exist in this world.
B. Some people find the idea of murder, rape and robbery so abhorrent that they never commit any of those acts throughout their lives.

And from that I'm postulating that an omnipotent god could have created the world such that everyone in it has the same aversion to murder, rape and robbery that I do. If you disagree with that, you seem to be working under a different definition of "omnipotent" that is classically used. I'm using the "can do anything not logically contradictory" definition. There's nothing about what I'm proposing that's logically contradictory. If you think there is, you'll need to point that out.

The conclusion of the above is necessarily a god that could have created a world like I've described, but didn't. And unless you're proposing a god that has wishes that this god can't fulfill, while being omnipotent (which seems self contradictory), it stands to reason this god created the world as it is because it desires it to be so. Hence, any existent omnipotent god desires that we murder, rape and steal from each other more than creating a world of free agents who have zero desire to do any of those things.

If you have any specific issues with my premises, let me know.

Good people kill for good reason so this is just one of the consequences that would change. There would be thousands to consider. I mentioned one big one above that the parts of the brain that cause someone to kill probably the frontal lobe are also the same parts that are associated with other functions. So taking those will also take the associated functions. They are there for good reason.

Give me a good reason to murder someone in a world where everyone was born with an aversion to murder. If you're referring to a situation where the frontal lobe is damaged, changing somone's personality, then are you saying an omnipotent god couldn't have created us so that doesn't happen?

I always find it funny when Christians talk about the idea that god can do anything in one breath, and in the next proposing something that their god can't do...

 

[stevevw]

There's no "messing with nature" involved at all. We're talking about a world in which everyone has the same aversion to murder, rape and theft that I do. Everyone is born this way, like I was born. Unless you're saying that there was some "messing with nature" in my birth?

Rather there would be some messing with nature to ensure that everyone ended up like you. It means that all the circumstances that may have caused some to become killers have to be controlled for. That is controlling peoples lives and changing many situations. In changing those situations you are taking away free will and also there would be other repercussions that will happen in changing those situations that will happen that will change the lives of people and have a knock on effect. But still I am speculating as I cannot know exactly everything that will happen as a result.

You seem to forget that we're talking about a world in which no one wants to harm another person, like I do in this world. So there would never be a situation where I would have a reason to murder someone. No war, no self defense.

Therefore you have to control a lot of situations that will have repercussions for free will. For example you may not be a killer now but circumstances happen where you do become one. All those circumstances cannot happen either which will have a ripple effect (butterfly effect) and change peoples lives for better or worse and those situations will have an effect and so on. It may end up that certain people were not even born or have bad things happen to them as a result.

Am I a human, since I don't want to kill, rape or steal? If I am human, the wouldn't a world of people born like me still equate into a world full of humans?

Yes but humans with restricted free will and the repercussions of that affecting them. It would be a very changed world and who knows what it would be like.

So you're saying that creating a world such that everyone is born without the desire to murder, rape and steal is too difficult for any god? I am remember proposing an omnipotnet god. Couple that with the fact that the percentage of people who murder presumedly isn't terribly high even in this world, and it doesn't seem that impossible for a god to have created a world in which no one wants to murder, rape or steal. I mean, I could take all the people I know who think the idea is abhorrent, and move to an island to create a society where no one is murdered. Does that make me more powerful than a god?

God has the power but doesn't do it for good reason as it would change creation to a point that would have far reaching consequences. So on your Island what happens if one of the people is born with a neurological disorder that causes that part of their brain to make them more aggressive or delusional that they become a killer. A drunk drives and kills a young daughter and the father is enraged and does something silly, not intending to kill but punches the driver and he falls and hits his head on the ground and dies.

You would have to cut out all the circumstances that may lead to people and circumstances leading to putting people in a mind-frame for even getting angry and doing something silly. Most murders are done this way where people like you who had no desire to kill ended up in bad circumstances.

You begin to have to avoid circumstances that may not seem like they are not associated with killing as well and the knock on effect grow bigger and that also has consequences. It begins to change lives and for better or worse. A small act can lead to changed circumstances in life which change a person in a way that they progress into a tail spin in life. Who knows where that ends and how that changes people.

We're not changing anyone in what I'm proposing, like I keep telling you. We would have all been born with an aversion to murder, rape and theft.

Yes but you said that people would be like you without a desire to kill. But life has the potential to make you a killer. It uses the same emotions and mind but due to circumstances turns that into a situation where you change and can kill. It is the same emotion that people who don't desire to kill which will cause people to kill due to circumstances.

Therefore you have to manipulate those circumstances as well to avoid people ending up becoming enraged. Now God is controlling peoples emotions as being enraged can be positive in motivating people to change things for the good.

This isn't an argument from ignorance in the slightest. I'm stating observant facts about this world:
A. Murder, rape and robbery exist in this world.
B. Some people find the idea of murder, rape and robbery so abhorrent that they never commit any of those acts throughout their lives.

And fact good people without the desire to murder through circumstances become murderers. Therefore fact you have to also change/stop those circumstances happening. Fact you begin to change the destinies and lives of many because all those circumstances are linked to other circumstances totally unrelated to the end result of murder.

And from that I'm postulating that an omnipotent god could have created the world such that everyone in it has the same aversion to murder, rape and robbery that I do. If you disagree with that, you seem to be working under a different definition of "omnipotent" that is classically used. I'm using the "can do anything not logically contradictory" definition. There's nothing about what I'm proposing that's logically contradictory. If you think there is, you'll need to point that out.

It depends what you mean by aversion. As you originally said that you have no desire to kill as you are without changing anything in your life that is fine. But most killers are like you without a desire to kill. Yet they end up killing due to circumstances. Therefore God would have to do more than make people without the desire to kill. He would also have to ensure every circumstance that leads people to kill doesn't happen. That begins to change things a lot and is meddling in peoples lives.

The conclusion of the above is necessarily a god that could have created a world like I've described, but didn't. And unless you're proposing a god that has wishes that this god can't fulfill, while being omnipotent (which seems self contradictory), it stands to reason this god created the world as it is because it desires it to be so. Hence, any existent omnipotent god desires that we murder, rape and steal from each other more than creating a world of free agents who have zero desire to do any of those things.

Your argument lacks a lack of consideration for what other circumstances are affected. It also is contradictory to Gods nature as written in the bible. So no matter how you rationalize things God by nature is good and has none of this implicated evil you are proposing. Just because he is all powerful doesn't mean he should have made the setup you are proposing as by implication of Gods nature the setup you propose is unworkable as God has already created the right situation and no other is workable to enable free agents and for nature to be what it is.

Being all knowing he has the ability to know this and has considered all alternative setups. What you are doing is claiming that your logic and knowledge is more comprehensive and can know everything to be confident that you are right which is impossible.

If you have any specific issues with my premises, let me know.

Already listed them.

Give me a good reason to murder someone in a world where everyone was born with an aversion to murder. If you're referring to a situation where the frontal lobe is damaged, changing somone's personality, then are you saying an omnipotent god couldn't have created us so that doesn't happen?

Yes now you are beginning to see how it isn't just about making people with a desire not to kill. It is also about changing circumstances that reach far and wide that may put people in situation that they kill. Epigentics may be that the person with the neurological condition meant that their parents lived a certain way that caused that. So the parents life has to change. The parents life may be the result of other circumstances that is associated with other peoples lives and so that circumstance has to be avoided. Suddenly God is changing peoples lives to the point he is taking free will and meddling too much.

I always find it funny when Christians talk about the idea that god can do anything in one breath, and in the next proposing something that their god can't do...

Just because he doesn't do something doesn't mean he cannot. It just means he chooses not to for good reason. Remember God is all good and works towards good.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Rather there would be some messing with nature to ensure that everyone ended up like you. It means that all the circumstances that may have caused some to become killers have to be controlled for. That is controlling peoples lives and changing many situations. In changing those situations you are taking away free will and also there would be other repercussions that will happen in changing those situations that will happen that will change the lives of people and have a knock on effect. But still I am speculating as I cannot know exactly everything that will happen as a result.

You still don't understand. You're not controlling people lives because people are born with no desire to murder, rape or steal. Unless you think that my life was controlled because I was born without any of these desires.

So, was my life "controlled"? If so, why should I care?

And unless you think I don't have free will, being born without any desire to kill, rape or steal has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. Having the ability to do something without the desire to ever do it doesn't mean you don't have free will. It's nonsensical to believe this.

Therefore you have to control a lot of situations that will have repercussions for free will. For example you may not be a killer now but circumstances happen where you do become one. All those circumstances cannot happen either which will have a ripple effect (butterfly effect) and change peoples lives for better or worse and those situations will have an effect and so on. It may end up that certain people were not even born or have bad things happen to them as a result.

Name a situation in a world where no one ever wants to rape someone where a "circumstance" would change that. You can't, because by definition it can't exist. And the butterfly effect means nothing, because in this world the same thing applies, and in my proposed world, this world would have never existed in the first place, so the phrase "certain people were not even born" is nonsensical.

Yes but humans with restricted free will and the repercussions of that affecting them. It would be a very changed world and who knows what it would be like.

Do you think I have "restricted" free will because I'll never choose to rape someone? If so, ask a rape victim whether they'd like to live in a world where rape exists, or one with "restricted" free will.

God has the power but doesn't do it for good reason as it would change creation to a point that would have far reaching consequences.

So? This sounds like a cop out.

So on your Island what happens if one of the people is born with a neurological disorder that causes that part of their brain to make them more aggressive or delusional that they become a killer. A drunk drives and kills a young daughter and the father is enraged and does something silly, not intending to kill but punches the driver and he falls and hits his head on the ground and dies.

If someone is born with a neurological disorder, they're treated. I don't get drink, none of my friends drink, so I can easily limit my island to people who don't drink, eliminating any drunk driving. And I would never hit anyone regardless. An island with people similar to me wouldn't drink and drive and wouldn't hit people.

You would have to cut out all the circumstances that may lead to people and circumstances leading to putting people in a mind-frame for even getting angry and doing something silly. Most murders are done this way where people like you who had no desire to kill ended up in bad circumstances.

Name a bad circumstance in the world I'm describing that would lead me to rape someone.

Yes but you said that people would be like you without a desire to kill. But life has the potential to make you a killer. It uses the same emotions and mind but due to circumstances turns that into a situation where you change and can kill. It is the same emotion that people who don't desire to kill which will cause people to kill due to circumstances.

I said murder, not kill, but regardless, there isn't a situation where I would murder anyone in this world, and in my proposed world, there would never be a reason.

Therefore you have to manipulate those circumstances as well to avoid people ending up becoming enraged. Now God is controlling peoples emotions as being enraged can be positive in motivating people to change things for the good.

No, this proposed god isn't controlling anyone, they're just being born like I was, and countless other people were. And if we aren't prone to violence, being enraged has no positive benefit at all. I very rarely get mad, and I'm never enraged. I suppose you're going to say I don't have free will, or that I'm a robot or something...

And fact good people without the desire to murder through circumstances become murderers. Therefore fact you have to also change/stop those circumstances happening. Fact you begin to change the destinies and lives of many because all those circumstances are linked to other circumstances totally unrelated to the end result of murder.

In my opinion, if you're a murderer, you're by definition a bad person.

It depends what you mean by aversion. As you originally said that you have no desire to kill as you are without changing anything in your life that is fine. But most killers are like you without a desire to kill. Yet they end up killing due to circumstances. Therefore God would have to do more than make people without the desire to kill. He would also have to ensure every circumstance that leads people to kill doesn't happen. That begins to change things a lot and is meddling in peoples lives.

Name a circumstance where I would become a rapist in a world where no one wants to hurt anyone. A world where an omnipotent god has taken things into account. A god that you apparently think can't exist for some reason. And it of course isn't "meddling" to have everyone born like I was, unless you think my life was "meddled" with before my birth.

Your argument lacks a lack of consideration for what other circumstances are affected. It also is contradictory to Gods nature as written in the bible. So no matter how you rationalize things God by nature is good and has none of this implicated evil you are proposing. Just because he is all powerful doesn't mean he should have made the setup you are proposing as by implication of Gods nature the setup you propose is unworkable as God has already created the right situation and no other is workable to enable free agents and for nature to be what it is.

That's not an argument against my scenario at all. You're just hand waving it away because it doesn't fit your narrative. This whole "best of all possible worlds" idea is nonsensical. So you believe this world, a world in which rape exists, is a better world than one where rape doesn't exist? If your answer is basically "yes, because my god says so", then we should probably just wrap this up now.

I find it interesting how a theist can be fine with a god who desires rape over the elimination of it...

Being all knowing he has the ability to know this and has considered all alternative setups. What you are doing is claiming that your logic and knowledge is more comprehensive and can know everything to be confident that you are right which is impossible.

See above.

Yes now you are beginning to see how it isn't just about making people with a desire not to kill. It is also about changing circumstances that reach far and wide that may put people in situation that they kill. Epigentics may be that the person with the neurological condition meant that their parents lived a certain way that caused that. So the parents life has to change. The parents life may be the result of other circumstances that is associated with other peoples lives and so that circumstance has to be avoided. Suddenly God is changing peoples lives to the point he is taking free will and meddling too much.

You keep getting this wrong. My proposed god isn't changing an existing world. It's creating a different world. There's no "meddling" and no restricting free will, unless you think I don't have free will.

Do you believe I have free will?

Just because he doesn't do something doesn't mean he cannot. It just means he chooses not to for good reason. Remember God is all good and works towards good.

Specifically, what good does rape serve in this world?

 

[stevevw]

You still don't understand. You're not controlling people lives because people are born with no desire to murder, rape or steal. Unless you think that my life was controlled because I was born without any of these desires.

The question is do you have the potential to kill someone if circumstances changed. It sound like your changing the goal posts and creeping towards someone being programmed not to murder. At first you compared the desire not to murder with yourself. But if this is the case your desire not to murder is dependent on no circumstances changing so that you end up in a situation where you will murder as you have the potential to murder. I think apart from neurological disorders everyone is born without the desire to murder. Yet we have many murders.

Name a situation in a world where no one ever wants to rape someone where a "circumstance" would change that. You can't, because by definition it can't exist. And the butterfly effect means nothing, because in this world the same thing applies, and in my proposed world, this world would have never existed in the first place, so the phrase "certain people were not even born" is nonsensical.

So a person is born in a Muslim country and unless they are born with Muslim beliefs they are a healthy normal baby that has no desire to rape. They are brought up in the Muslim faith and become radicalized to regard women as sex objects and end up raping a women. They didn't have the desire to rape but were then conditioned to rape. The same as stealing. A person is born without the desire to steal but ends up in a situation where he has no money to buy food. They are so hungry they steal some food.

A person without the desire to kill like yourself finds themselves in a war situation where they killed. A mentally deranged person with a gun starts attacking you and in the scuffle the gun drops to the ground and you pick it up. He then lunges at you with a knife and you shoot him in self defense. This can be applied to a jealous friend who thinks you are having an affair with his wife and attacks you. That's unless you want to remove all these emotions and conditions that can happen to people as well.

Do you think I have "restricted" free will because I'll never choose to rape someone? If so, ask a rape victim whether they'd like to live in a world where rape exists, or one with "restricted" free will.

The problem I have is that you may not have the desire only because you have not ended up in that situation. Many people who originally had no desire to rape have gone on to rape. So what I am saying is if you make everyone to never have the desire to rape then you also have to remove all the situations that may cause people to want to rape steal or kill. That is unreal as it removes a big chunk of life as a lot of the conditions that cause people to want to do those things also allow people to do good things.

So? This sounds like a cop out.

How do you know its a cop out. Do you have verifiable evidence that it is. If God is all good by nature and cannot do evil how is that a cop out. It is a statement about Gods nature which is written in the bible. We either understand Gods nature by his word or don't try and speculate what God is like in the first place. You can try to fit God into your subjective and personal idea without going to the source to find out what he is like.

So when you start saying OK now God must have been evil because he did this and allowed that and then refer to the bible and it states he cannot be evil you then have to reassess you ideas as this conflicts with his word. Unless you want to question his word. Then we move into a lot of speculating about everything.

If someone is born with a neurological disorder, they're treated. I don't get drink, none of my friends drink, so I can easily limit my island to people who don't drink, eliminating any drunk driving. And I would never hit anyone regardless. An island with people similar to me wouldn't drink and drive and wouldn't hit people.

See so now you started with people without the desire to kill, rape and steal. Then you start eliminating people who drink as this may lead to killing yet good people drink and there is nothing wrong with it. Then you have to eliminate people who hit people which is a natural instinct in human evolution for fight and flight. We hit and kick an animal that may try to eat us or we hit someone who is hitting us in self defense.

That is only two circumstances but there are thousands and thousands of situations that can be the same which you then have to eliminate. Suddenly your simple elimination fo the desire to kill becomes the elimination of many aspects of human life and before you know it we have lost important aspects of being human. Conditions are too controlled and we lose our freedom.

Name a bad circumstance in the world I'm describing that would lead me to rape someone.

I already did above. But here's a point. I don't think people are born to rape. So they have the desire to not rape like you. Yet we have many rapes. How did this happen. Something happened along the way that caused those people to rape. maybe conditioning, being treated badly, extreme religion, desperation, in an intimate situation that went too far as many rapes do because they were overcome with lust. Who knows but the fact is something happened because they did not want to rape and then things changed and they wanted to rape.

I said murder, not kill, but regardless, there isn't a situation where I would murder anyone in this world, and in my proposed world, there would never be a reason.

So people can kill which could mean shooting someone in self defense but not murder. Your walking a very think line I think. The fact is good people like yourself that will say I will never murder anyone can end up murdering someone because just about all murders did not have the desire to murder. Circumstances and conditions change where they were turned into murders. You would have to remove the circumstances that turns people into murders as well.

No, this proposed god isn't controlling anyone, they're just being born like I was, and countless other people were. And if we aren't prone to violence, being enraged has no positive benefit at all. I very rarely get mad, and I'm never enraged. I suppose you're going to say I don't have free will, or that I'm a robot or something...

No I am going to say that the circumstances you have experiences have allowed you to be the way you are. But another person may not be so lucky. They started out like you but ended up in a bad situation as mentioned above.

But you are adding things to this make believe scenario as you go such as " aren't prone to violence, being enraged has no positive benefit at all". That sounds like your now limiting the positive aspects of these emotions as well which to me is now digging deeper into a persons psych and taking more and more away. It has to have some effect.

In my opinion, if you're a murderer, you're by definition a bad person.

So therefore you would have to remove all the things that make that person bad as well. This supports my previous claim that a murderer is conditioned. Something makes them bad and you have to be a bad person first before you eventually progress to murder. So all the desires in those situations that make them bad have to be removed as well. Yet many of those desires that make people bad are not always associated with murders.

Circumstances happen as well, like wrong time, wrong place, jealous boyfriend happen to have lost his job that day and was drinking as a result. It can be a perfect storm of events that culminate in murder. If you watch those detective shows you see how the events pan out where perfectly decent and normal people end up murdering.

Name a circumstance where I would become a rapist in a world where no one wants to hurt anyone. A world where an omnipotent god has taken things into account. A god that you apparently think can't exist for some reason. And it of course isn't "meddling" to have everyone born like I was, unless you think my life was "meddled" with before my birth.

I think this is the third time you have asked me this and I've answered that already. But what I am noticing is that you are changing things and adding more conditions as you go. Now in this world people don't have the desire to hurt anyone at all and not just murder but hurt feelings or let people down as well.

It is becoming a pretty perfect world where we are getting parts of being human taken away bit by bit. Why not just say in this world people are good all the time in everything and cannot know what evil is. But then we couldn't know what good meant without know the opposite. Like C.S. Lewis said how can I know that a line is straight unless I know what a crooked line is as well.

That's not an argument against my scenario at all. You're just hand waving it away because it doesn't fit your narrative. This whole "best of all possible worlds" idea is nonsensical. So you believe this world, a world in which rape exists, is a better world than one where rape doesn't exist? If your answer is basically "yes, because my god says so", then we should probably just wrap this up now.

No you are proposing a logical fallacy of "either and or". It may be that God does desire a better world but sin and evil have wrecked things. But that God is working on restoring things so that this better world where rape, murder and stealing don't exist. That is what the bible says exactly what will happen.

I find it interesting how a theist can be fine with a god who desires rape over the elimination of it...

No I would like a world without all this and it will happen.

You keep getting this wrong. My proposed god isn't changing an existing world. It's creating a different world. There's no "meddling" and no restricting free will, unless you think I don't have free will.

First it was about our world and then you keep changing things. Its like playing the Sims and making things up as you go. Or some multiverse world slightly different to our own. This world can never really be tested so its all hypothetical. Even so we can only try to imagine what it would be like by comparing it to what we have now.

Do you believe I have free will?

Specifically, what good does rape serve in this world?

Nothing but that's not the point. Rape is the extreme of lust which is a natural desire. Unfortunately sin entered the world and this brought with it a fallen nature. That fallen nature is carnal and capable of being depraved. Soon these evil acts will be gone and God will restore heaven and earth to how it should be. So if you really want a part of Gods kingdom then get on board.

But what I find interesting is if there is no God then how do you account for these evil deeds like rape and murder. How do we ever get to a world where there is no rape and murder. Anyway this is getting a little of topic and going round in circles.