Atheist morality.

[Gadarene]

Um, I don't think I'm God, I know a lot of people who feel the same way and are not trying to control how you believe. Saying " no shortage of Christian's" is making a generalization by inference.

No, it isn't. It is saying that there is some number of them.

You also seem apparently unconcerned about actual generalisations made about atheists in this thread.

 

[Cute Tink]

I personally don't care about your lifestyle choices and I'm a Christian. It's easy to generalize groups of people like that if you have an agenda though.

Others said pretty much what I meant, but I'm going to personally clarify.

I didn't say just Christians for a reason. I know plenty of Christians who really aren't interested in controlling others. I don't care if it's a minority or a majority. There are plenty who want to legislate "lifestyle choices" in the US right into criminalization.

I said "no shortage" for a reason. That doesn't mean all or imply it. It just means that there are enough of them.

 

[bhsmte]

Others said pretty much what I meant, but I'm going to personally clarify.

I didn't say just Christians for a reason. I know plenty of Christians who really aren't interested in controlling others. I don't care if it's a minority or a majority. There are plenty who want to legislate "lifestyle choices" in the US right into criminalization.

I said "no shortage" for a reason. That doesn't mean all or imply it. It just means that there are enough of them.

And that group you describe, tend to be quite loud don't they?

 

[Cute Tink]

And that group you describe, tend to be quite loud don't they?

At times they very well can be and that may give a more inflated image of how many feel that way

 

[stevevw]

I have no idea what you're trying to say in that second sentence. Could you reword it?

Because secular society has to include everyone through equal rights it means that no matter what lifestyle you have it has an equal right to be accepted. So if you believe that porn is good and want to promote it on TV or the internet and in magazines then you can. Not only that if you are discriminated against you can take action so that you get your equal opportunity. This goes for almost anything such as witchcraft, different occults, violence, advertisement targeting young people with alcohol and sex, promiscuous lifestyles, gun laws, sexual lifestyles and general censorship regulations which allow almost anything. Even some of the extreme and radical groups to do with race and extreme ideas are accepted because they have their right to exist.

Other secular attitudes like marriage, sex within relationships, what the young are allowed to do and not do, media censorship ect are dictated by whatever consensus secular society will have. So this is normally out of step with any Christians and religions and will allow almost anything so long as its not braking the laws and regulations. Of course as a christian we will disagree with some or most of these and so will most religious organizations.

So because society will all allow this any strong foundation for building any moral standards is wiped out because you cant establish it in the first place. You have to include all attitudes towards these areas and people will object and want to be included so you will get all sorts of values and beliefs mixed in and accepted. I am not necessarily saying that all is wrong but that it allows some things that I believe are wrong and perhaps can be shown to lead to problems and the breakdown of society.

Its the thin edge of the wedge effect. What starts out as allowing say the young to see sex and violence in the media all the time or on the net then causes other problems. When society allows sex between consenting couples or with more than one person or even celebrate when someone cheats on their partner like in the gossip columns of Hollywood it leads to problems. You then get the breakdowns in relationships especially with the young and underage sex and other problems which can lead to other problems like depression. If society promotes drinking and partying as cool then the young end up with a substance abuse problem. The legalization of pot is just one example. If we promote gambling because we allow the big business to promote because they buy off the media then we end up with a massive gambling problem that has a bunch of other problems attached to it. This happened with tobacco and at one stage they had us believing that smoking was good.

So because there is no clear stance and set of guidelines and morals and someone can justify or reason that its all OK then it allows it to be included. It will also allow corruption and compromise as well because things are based on who can buy their way into the market and pay someone off to promote themselves. A christian has no chance of having their beliefs and standard accepted as it would be seen as to controlling. So even if i as a christian disagree with a lot of whats going on I cant do anything apart from making some objections. Normally a lot of religious charities are left cleaning up the mess from what society is allowing. This is what Christians will call the ways of the world and that we live in this world but are not a part of the system in that we dont go along with societies practices but live according to Gods will.

Because some people recognize that certain activities which you would consider to be promiscuous and perverse can actually be good for relationships.

Yes this is what I am talking about. But there maybe some truth to parts of it but we have to take the rest with it which to most will not be good. They will use that small truth to get leverage to justify why it is good or needed and this will get them in the back door. Then we have to allow all that they promote as well even if its wrong morally.

Not at all. It's just that the standards that are winning out aren't the ones that you prefer. The absence of the stringencies of your own moral code does not imply a complete lack of moral standards.

The point is it also allows standards and things that are proven to lead to problems as well. Quite often society believes certain methods work best but they are really being motivated by money reasons or pressure groups and it ends up not working and causing other problems. We had a problem with the young being targeted with alco pops in advertisement. Even though it was against the law companies were still targeting the young as this was a big market. They also do this in clubs and pubs as they will compulsively buy. We then had a problem with the youth drinking. So they put a tax on the alco pops to stop it. This then pushed the young to buy straight spirits and their own pop drinks and do the mixing themselves. So it made the problem worse.

So because society was promoting this party lifestyle and adults were not really seeing any problem with the young having a drink they seen this as a role model and the were getting out of control. But instead of dealing with it properly the govt took band aid measures which made it worse. They didnt want to know about changing attitutes in society about drinking as they havnt got the time or money they reckon. But it comes back to bite them with bigger problems in the end.

You can see why this would be an illogical choice for someone who does not believe that the Abrahamic God exists.

Yes probably but there is research that shows people who belong to religious groups will not have as many of these problems. It stands to reason. If their beliefs say be in a monogamous relationship then they are avoiding a lot of the problems associated with that area. If their belief says their body is the temple of God or that God is the only crutch they need then they are avoiding a lot of those problems associated with substance abuse. If you take this across the board then Christians are avoiding a lot of societies problems. This doesn't mean they dont have any and some religious groups are more allowing but generally I believe that a Christians belief in God steers them in the right direction in life. So its not just morally good but also physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually good.

 

[JGG]

Because secular society has to include everyone through equal rights it means that no matter what lifestyle you have it has an equal right to be accepted. So if you believe that porn is good and want to promote it on TV or the internet and in magazines then you can. Not only that if you are discriminated against you can take action so that you get your equal opportunity. This goes for almost anything such as witchcraft, different occults, violence, advertisement targeting young people with alcohol and sex, promiscuous lifestyles, gun laws, sexual lifestyles and general censorship regulations which allow almost anything. Even some of the extreme and radical groups to do with race and extreme ideas are accepted because they have their right to exist.

Other secular attitudes like marriage, sex within relationships, what the young are allowed to do and not do, media censorship ect are dictated by whatever consensus secular society will have. So this is normally out of step with any Christians and religions and will allow almost anything so long as its not braking the laws and regulations. Of course as a christian we will disagree with some or most of these and so will most religious organizations.

So because society will all allow this any strong foundation for building any moral standards is wiped out because you cant establish it in the first place. You have to include all attitudes towards these areas and people will object and want to be included so you will get all sorts of values and beliefs mixed in and accepted. I am not necessarily saying that all is wrong but that it allows some things that I believe are wrong and perhaps can be shown to lead to problems and the breakdown of society.

Its the thin edge of the wedge effect. What starts out as allowing say the young to see sex and violence in the media all the time or on the net then causes other problems. When society allows sex between consenting couples or with more than one person or even celebrate when someone cheats on their partner like in the gossip columns of Hollywood it leads to problems. You then get the breakdowns in relationships especially with the young and underage sex and other problems which can lead to other problems like depression. If society promotes drinking and partying as cool then the young end up with a substance abuse problem. The legalization of pot is just one example. If we promote gambling because we allow the big business to promote because they buy off the media then we end up with a massive gambling problem that has a bunch of other problems attached to it. This happened with tobacco and at one stage they had us believing that smoking was good.

So because there is no clear stance and set of guidelines and morals and someone can justify or reason that its all OK then it allows it to be included. It will also allow corruption and compromise as well because things are based on who can buy their way into the market and pay someone off to promote themselves. A christian has no chance of having their beliefs and standard accepted as it would be seen as to controlling. So even if i as a christian disagree with a lot of whats going on I cant do anything apart from making some objections. Normally a lot of religious charities are left cleaning up the mess from what society is allowing. This is what Christians will call the ways of the world and that we live in this world but are not a part of the system in that we dont go along with societies practices but live according to Gods will.

Yes this is what I am talking about. But there maybe some truth to parts of it but we have to take the rest with it which to most will not be good. They will use that small truth to get leverage to justify why it is good or needed and this will get them in the back door. Then we have to allow all that they promote as well even if its wrong morally.

The point is it also allows standards and things that are proven to lead to problems as well. Quite often society believes certain methods work best but they are really being motivated by money reasons or pressure groups and it ends up not working and causing other problems. We had a problem with the young being targeted with alco pops in advertisement. Even though it was against the law companies were still targeting the young as this was a big market. They also do this in clubs and pubs as they will compulsively buy. We then had a problem with the youth drinking. So they put a tax on the alco pops to stop it. This then pushed the young to buy straight spirits and their own pop drinks and do the mixing themselves. So it made the problem worse.

So because society was promoting this party lifestyle and adults were not really seeing any problem with the young having a drink they seen this as a role model and the were getting out of control. But instead of dealing with it properly the govt took band aid measures which made it worse. They didnt want to know about changing attitutes in society about drinking as they havnt got the time or money they reckon. But it comes back to bite them with bigger problems in the end.

Yes probably but there is research that shows people who belong to religious groups will not have as many of these problems. It stands to reason. If their beliefs say be in a monogamous relationship then they are avoiding a lot of the problems associated with that area. If their belief says their body is the temple of God or that God is the only crutch they need then they are avoiding a lot of those problems associated with substance abuse. If you take this across the board then Christians are avoiding a lot of societies problems. This doesn't mean they dont have any and some religious groups are more allowing but generally I believe that a Christians belief in God steers them in the right direction in life. So its not just morally good but also physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually good.

You know what you'd like? A theocracy.

 

[Cearbhall]

Because secular society has to include everyone through equal rights it means that no matter what lifestyle you have it has an equal right to be accepted.

Unless the lifestyle infringes upon someone else's rights.

So if you believe that porn is good and want to promote it on TV or the internet and in magazines then you can. Not only that if you are discriminated against you can take action so that you get your equal opportunity. This goes for almost anything such as witchcraft, different occults, violence, advertisement targeting young people with alcohol and sex, promiscuous lifestyles, gun laws, sexual lifestyles and general censorship regulations which allow almost anything. Even some of the extreme and radical groups to do with race and extreme ideas are accepted because they have their right to exist.

Other secular attitudes like marriage, sex within relationships, what the young are allowed to do and not do, media censorship ect are dictated by whatever consensus secular society will have.

Yes, free speech is one of our core American values.

So this is normally out of step with any Christians and religions and will allow almost anything so long as its not braking the laws and regulations. Of course as a christian we will disagree with some or most of these and so will most religious organizations.

74% of Americans are Christian, so not really.

So because society will all allow this any strong foundation for building any moral standards is wiped out because you cant establish it in the first place.

No. It's just that the new moral standards in society classify some of your moral standards as immoral.

 

[stevevw]

You know what you'd like? A theocracy.

No it would work. They say never mix religion and politics. There would be riots. People get peed off at just the mention of any religion getting involved in having a say about what they can and cant do. It is about control and people want the freedom to do whatever they want to do. They rebel at the thought of having to be subjective to God.

 

[stevevw]

Unless the lifestyle infringes upon someone else's rights.

I agree but its not as simple as that. There are many indirect reprocussions that filter through and have an effect. Take the gambling industry. People want it, the industry wants it and its promoted as fun and exciting and the chance to win and make your dreams come true. But it can destroy peoples lives as well and the evidence shows it is taking money away from kids when the parents gamble. But that is not immediately obvious and the industry will donate to certain organisations and market themselves so that they look good and buy some credibility. This makes it harder to put the blame on them. People also argue its not the gambling but the gambler which is a bit similar to the gun debate. So in one way or another they get around it. Everything is corrupted or rationalized and justified as being acceptable and so it weakens any stand that can be taken against doing something. The young that get drunk and the people that self abuse and all the other individual choices can affect others with health care costs which are not immediately obvious. But we are all paying for it so it does affect you and me in some ways.

Yes, free speech is one of our core American values.

But we get more than we bargain for. It comes at a cost. Free speech also allows people to destroy each other with verbal attacks through social media as well.

74% of Americans are Christian, so not really.

I never believe this. If thats the case then they are not practicing what they preach and are hypocrites. I think its just a trendy thing to say and be. Afterall isn't God on the dollar bill.

No. It's just that the new moral standards in society classify some of your moral standards as immoral.

The new moral standards in society are no moral standards really. If they can allow for unbridled porn access on the net which also can be accessed by the young on smart phones then porn is the new God. It has moved from the back rooms to the living rooms and is becoming acceptable. So its not the new morals its no morals are allowed so that we have a right to do whatever we want and pursue whatever pleasures we wish.

 

[JGG]

No it would work. They say never mix religion and politics. There would be riots. People get peed off at just the mention of any religion getting involved in having a say about what they can and cant do. It is about control and people want the freedom to do whatever they want to do. They rebel at the thought of having to be subjective to God.

Actually, they rebel at the though of having to be subjective to you and your buddies.

 

[stevevw]

Actually, they rebel at the though of having to be subjective to you and your buddies.

Who am I and who are my buddies. But in saying that funny how we are quite happy to put our lives in the hands of corrupt pollies who take our hard earned money and waste it down the drain. They use it to buy themselves holidays and all the lurks and perks that they give themselves. Then they bring in more legislation so that they can waste even more and rip us off again and again and destroy our way of life. They are corrupt and sell their souls to the devil to keep their power and position and we allow them to get away with it year after year. They have proved this with the GFC and the collaspe of our economies all over the world. The US is digging a deeper and deeper hole that they will never get out of and the same with my country and the rest of the world. Yet we are willing to give them chances over and over again. I dont think we can do any worse than who we have running the show now.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I believe that morality for those who do not accept a divine lawmaker or a divine standard is subjective by it's very nature because it has no standard to base itself upon.

I recognize such an objective standard. It can be done. No, I don't use my feelings to detect this standard. It's a matter for philosophy.

But all peoples morals are subjective, even those who believe in a divine lawmaker simply value the concept of the lawmaker, their value of him/it and it's right to decide law is subjective, they simply value or feel that the concept of the divine lawmaker is incredibly important or good.

I'm not certain that really follows. Do they "simply" value or feel this, or do they value or feel as they do because of their understanding of the implications of a divine lawmaker for human life?

I personally don't agree that all morals are necessarily subjective in the sense of being merely a matter of taste, attitude, feeling, or desire and nothing else.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Eudaimonist]

Would you mind telling me about it?

I'm willing to, though a proper discussion would take some time.

Just to start things off, I think that this video might be helpful. It only touches on the issue, but it helps to lay the ground.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgbO8iCJVx8

I do not think the amount of complexity behind or in addition to their feelings or values change that they are still raising their so called objective standard because they value it or feel that they should.

It's much more than mere "complexity". You are suggesting that their views are merely about feelings (or valuing, by which I suppose you mean choosing and pursuing). If you recognize that a value is not merely desired, but is actually desirable, and not merely valued, but valuable, there's more going on than mere feeling or intent.

If a value is something that you actually need to value because of who and what you are -- a particular living human individual with a natural function and a natural good -- then there is more going on that what you suggest.

For instance, Christians claim that their system is objective because it's based on an unchanging diety and they have no choice but to agree... but their adherence to such a system is still based on the fact that they feel that the god matters and that he should be obeyed

You are using the word "feel" again. While some Christians may just "feel" that, that doesn't mean that all do that or that feelings are the only consideration. (I'm not especially trying to defend Christians here. I'm defending moral realism from subjectivist criticisms.)

Can you show me a system that a person has that does not require the person to feel like they should obey or does not require the person to value it?

Any chosen action requires some sort of felt motivation, but that is not the point.

The point is that your felt motivation isn't necessarily required in order to make a value something good and worthy of being chosen and pursued. So, if the reason that one values something is that one recognizes that there is a reason why one ought to value that something, then it's not just an arbitrary matter of feelings. It is in one's best interests to value that something, and thus not wholly subjective in the sense of merely a matter of taste or attitude.

I mean we are in fact talking about morals and morals are what we believe or consider or value, how can they be anything other than expressions of ourselves?

They can be expressions of the requirements of our lives as human beings, something for which we have a natural interest in valuing. In other words, one's good can be more than just "an expression of ourselves", and may have a factual basis in reality outside of mere taste or desire.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[stevevw]

stevevw

No it doesn't. A moral system that is not based on a divine law giver would not be obligated to include everyone or everything, it still has it's own moral system, it still has things it disapproves of and it still says no to those things.

Then what is that moral system. Who dictates what is included and what isn't.

No it doesn't. A moral system that is based on what we believe rather than on a certain character says just disapproves of different things, it isn't true that it disapproves of nothing.

But you keep saying what we believe. Who is we and what do they believe. We to me means more than one belief and value. If we have to accommodate many different beliefs and values then we have no one solid foundation but many. There are certain laws that we have to abide by like dont abuse children but thats where it stops. What we teach our young is subjected to the many ideas that society has ie the movies we promote, the allowances we give our young, the censorship laws we have ect.

It isn't true that non religious moral systems allow anything that is believed, it simply allows what IT believes and while this may seem like everything to you, it is not everything. We simply use different reasons and promote or restrict different things.

And what does it believe. Thats what I'm saying it cant be to specific. We have to abide by the laws but beyond that many things are acceptable. If someone in the room believes that having several sex partners at the same time is OK then they have the right to practice that. If someone in the room believes that their teenage kids can smoke pot and drink then thats accepted. If someone believes in the occult then thats accepted and everything that goes with it is accepted. If someone is promoting anarchy then thats OK to. If someone believes that defying their parents is OK and they have more rights than oldies than thats OK as well. So long as its not braking the laws it is acceptable.

What you've provided is not a proper picture of non religious moral systems, you've simply provided that a moral system that must approve everything will forbid nothing but non religious moral systems do not have to approve everything. Maybe you feel like for lack of the reasons you value that it would or should approve everything but that doesn't describe what it actually does.

OK then you tell me what it is like because I dont know what it is. I know there are a lot of good people in society and I am not saying that society is bad and religion is good. I am merely saying that i find it hard to see how any strong foundational moral standards can be established in society in general. You will get certain standards established in smaller organizations with their code of conduct and guidelines and they will reflect that organizations mission statement. But on a social level generally its hard to determine. If you go out socially you will have many different morals and values with a group. Some will have liberal attitudes towards sex and others more conservative. But generally i believe its the more liberal that wins out or seems to do in the end. Whether this stems from a free and liberal society I dont know. But that seems to be the way. To a christian we would be having some restrictions on this but to society they dont want those restrictions.

No you don't...

I can name some pretty crazy groups that are accepted in society. There are occult groups and all sorts of beliefs that have to have their equal time in the limelight and be accepted in society. Many can promote themselves and have every right to do what they do.

Above you are describing your moral system, you're just providing your values, not showing why a non religious system would hurt society. That cheating on a spouse or a breakdown of a relationship is morally wrong are simply your values.

No not really. I am trying not to bring that side into it but establish that a system without any clear and strong common guidelines can be sidetracked and undermined. If it is divided then its hard to stand on any foundation. One example would be our attitudes on sex in a relationships. It can be shown that having several partners puts you at risk of sexual transmitted disease, unwanted pregnancies which can lead to abortions and relationship breakdowns which can cause emotional problems and depression.

So societies attitude allows and even promotes that its OK to have affairs and casual sex such as we see promoted in the movies music videos and magazines as the latest gossip about so and so getting together with someone else. Its even seen as something thats good as the new romance and latest big news about who has got with who and dumped the other person. So societies role models are doing it, many of peoples peers think there's nothing wrong with it and most accept it as the done thing. I think this may stem from a freedom of lifestyle and sexual expression that society believes is OK. But we can see the repercussions from the behavior and attitudes and know that it can have negative consequences.

Again you're not showing how it's hurt society, you're just proclaiming that it has based on the fact that it's what you think is bad. What you call a substance problem may not considered bad or dangerous or immoral at all.

It is not just me that is saying that certain things will hurt society or have repercussions. It is a common understanding. The fall out from substance abuse is not to do with religions its just is that way. When people abuse substances they have problems. But the reason why it gets out of hand is because societies attitude towards drinking, medication and drugs in general. We live in a party and good time age where everyone wants to celebrate and have a drink. It all goes hand in hand with social drugs and one leads to the other. many want to legalize pot now as they see it as not a problem. Prescribed medication has been on the rise and people are turning to pills as a way to cope. Doctors and pharmaceutical companies want to promote their latest pill that can help you get by. We have a pill for everything now. So this is societies way of doing it and the greed of companies wanting to make money from selling their products even if it means getting everyone addicted to pills.

It's not true that there is not. All people have something they believe is right or wrong a non religious moral system simply lacks what the religious system deems necessary and good, leaving the religious person with the impression that it is completely unclear and inadequate but this simply isn't true, it's just their subjective opinion.

Fair enough. I am not saying that individuals dont have a set of morals or values. I am merely saying as a society it is hard to harness that into one common belief and system. In smaller groups yes but society is normally subject to things like the media, wealthy and powerful companies promoting their agendas and governments who well, whatever keeps them in power..

Well yes a person could I guess but that doesn't mean that the non religious system does. Everyone has things they disagree with. You seem to simply think that because we allow so much more than you, that we allow anything.

Well it isn't anything and everything. There are laws that stop certain things. But even they cant stop everything. But sometimes our attitudes and the things we do can lead to causing things to happen in the longer run. Like say allowing violence in movies and games. Now some say this doesn't have an effect and some say it does. Perhaps its somewhere in the middle. But certainly for those who are mentally unstable it maybe a factor. So we can cultivate the next generation of maniacs by what we do now. When parents grow up in poverty and domestic violence, family breakdowns and substance abuse the chances of the next generation turning out that way are much higher. They will have problems with education, relationships and the law and cost society in the health system. So what we do now can have an effect later. Maybe what we are seeing now with the mental illness and depression and suicide now is from the last generations things they allowed or did.

The idea that non-religious people or their systems do not care for integrity is nonsense.

No I'm not saying that. Its something that is perhaps bigger than individuals and smaller groups. Individuals care and organizations care. I'm not sure big business cares when they want to promote themselves and make profits at the expense of integrity or people. I'm not sure that governments always really care. But generally overall society as a Juggernaut dictates how we all will live and can scoop up many along the way. Its ironic in some ways as we profess that we want our rights and freedoms but we dont really realize that we are slaves to the society we live in. Forever slaving away to get by and do what we are told and have to get things to be like everyone else and fit in. Makes you want to escape to the country on a farm and be self sufficient with your own cows and veggies.

This isn't true. A christian could have a value that the non-religious agree with such as murder rape and theft are bad and now you've actually just provided that most of what you've said so far is false. If Christians would not be allowed to have a voice or wouldn't be considered then NO... all things would not be allowed and something being believed would NOT mean it would be accepted. You've just displayed that yes we do have reasons and values and no a non-religious system would not accept everything. You seem to be confusing your morals with all moral concepts.

The laws stop us from doing the obvious. But even that really doesnt. Our jails are getting over crowded. Even the justice system and the way we view rehabilitation isnt working. We just lock them up, fine people or let them off lightly. There is little true repairing so that people can sort themselves out and stop committing offenses. The system seems to be geared towards much of the same and either ignoring the problem or having some band aid attempts at fixing it.

There are many good people in society that are doing good things. But sometimes its like one step forward and two steps back. Overall its hard to male headway and establish any real foundation for change.

But yes the amount of control Christians normally try to exert is considered very bad.

I dont think Christians can get involved in trying to run society. Your right in one seb=nse we have a bad track record. But I believe this is more to do with politicizing religion rather than a true christian approach. If you go to an christian church I believe you can see a common goal and a strong foundation that can achieve things. But it wouldn't work in society as there are to many different beliefs and opinions.

I dont believe that a christian should be trying to get people to do this or that and follow the laws of God. Being a christian is a change in nature. We have to acknowledge that we are sinners as much as anyone. We are incapable of keeping the law and our weakness of the flesh causes us t sin time and time again. So we become born again and live in the spirit of God through the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. He defeated the flesh and sin and we can be set free from the law by allowing Christ to rein in our hearts. This way its not about who is doing this or that and who is or keeping to some strict moral code. The spirit of God cannot abide with the flesh which sins and the flesh cannot live with the spirit of god.

Galatians 5: 16- 26
16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Earlier you provided that if something is believed it would automatically be accepted in the non-religious system because non-religious systems have no clear or formed rules and they accept all things.
As you provide above, one reason Christian systems are frowned on and discredited is that while you act like you want goodness and morality and care about this world... you actually don't, you think it's simply an evil place and you're waiting to leave so your god can destroy it. It's you who doesn't value this world or believe in it, not us. You're just waiting to leave and you believe it's evil, any real concern on your part of it being good is a falsehood because already believe it's "the world" and evil is what it is. Believe me I do wish your people would go ahead and leave sometimes. You don't even want to be here, you don't really care.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I dont judge anyone but just say my point of view as a Christian. I live in this world but as a christian I try not to conform to what secular society believes. But i work in this world and I try to help others both practically and spiritually when i can. But I realize that everyone is not the same and I am accepting of others no matter what their lifestyles and beliefs or race or creed. Jesus associated with the sinners and the outcasts as these are the ones he came to help and save. It was the religious hypocrites I think you are referring to who looked down on others and thought they were better. This only put people off and they had no chance of achieving anything.

The post is to long now it will have to be broken up otherwise it wont fit.

 

[Eudaimonist]

But when you say something is valuable you're only expressing that you value it.

No. I. Am. Not.

I'm a bit busy now, so I'll get back to you with a fuller reply later.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[stevevw]

stevevw

When I used the words "we" and "non-religious" I meant people like me and the non-religious. I wasn't referring to any specific belief, I was just providing something contrary to religious ideas.

You say you are not referring to any specific belief. So what beliefs do you and non religious society believe in then. What if someone disagrees with the particular beliefs you choose. Don't they have the right to disagree and put forward what they believe according to equal rights.

 

[JGG]

Who am I and who are my buddies.

Religious theocrats.

But in saying that funny how we are quite happy to put our lives in the hands of corrupt pollies who take our hard earned money and waste it down the drain. They use it to buy themselves holidays and all the lurks and perks that they give themselves. Then they bring in more legislation so that they can waste even more and rip us off again and again and destroy our way of life. They are corrupt and sell their souls to the devil to keep their power and position and we allow them to get away with it year after year. They have proved this with the GFC and the collaspe of our economies all over the world. The US is digging a deeper and deeper hole that they will never get out of and the same with my country and the rest of the world. Yet we are willing to give them chances over and over again. I dont think we can do any worse than who we have running the show now.

...Anyway...

Yeah, we really could do a whole lot worse. Would you really be willing to move to a country that dictates what you can wear, what you can eat, what books you can read, etc...?

 

[Ruthie24]

Religious theocrats? Did someone just commit a Merriam Webster's felony? :-0 ;-)

 

[stevevw]

stevevw

There are plenty of things that almost all of us agree on and consider to be enforceable. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

I agree there are the laws that we all agree should be enforced like i said with child abuse or any abuse towards people. We have legislation's that mean we have to report abuses especially child abuse. But there are many standards and examples that we can teach others and especially the young that are not subject to laws so therefore people can have different views on how they teach the young what is the right thing to do. One families values will be different to the next. One might allow drinking and drug use in the home and one might allow the kids to watch what ever on the tele. Most young get their values and ideas from music and the media such as social media and stuff on the internet or their peers. They look up to the pop and movie stars and how they live their lives. You can see this reflected in the way they will dress and act when certain stars set the trends ie Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears a few years ago. So they are subject to many different influences and its hard for them to know which way to go sometimes.

Well I wasn't trying to be specific. I don't need to show you what I actually believe in order to tell you that I have beliefs. Do you doubt that I have beliefs? This conversation isn't about what I believe. I was just trying to show you how systems unlike yours do exist and they do say there are things you should and should not do. I also do not want the conversation to become a petty argument about whether or not my belief or your belief is good bad right or wrong.

I wasn't trying to see what you believed sorry. I meant what do you think the beliefs are that society follow. Are there a list or are they unwritten morals that everyone knows for example.

If the the secular system considered that this was wrong it would prohibit it. Non-religious systems do not simply accept something based on another believing it, an example are your christian beliefs.

Thats where i think we are misunderstanding each other. The things I am referring to are not necessarily against the law or something that people have to prohibit. It maybe as subtle as allowing your kid out late at night or allowing them to drink at home. It maybe what the censorship regulations consider ok like the level of violence they allow young people to view. These can all have an effect on how people behave and turn out. So whatever society through the media especially allow then this is really what we believe to be acceptable. Even though you or I may not have given our personal point of view or disagree with it. It has been implimented because it was deemed by some study or group that represents society that it is acceptable and allowable. Usually its a reflection of society in general.

You need to show that this is a requirement of non-religious systems. Why would it be? I said all this before.

Its not necessarily a requirement but just is the way it is. Many young have less respect for adults nowadays. The generation x as they have been referred to seem to expect more for less.This may stem from the parents and adults of the past generation being to soft or trying to give their kids everything or protect them to much. They stopped corporal punishment in schools for example which was fair enough as it was a form of abuse. But they didn't necessarily replace it with a proper punishment system. So many young picked up on this and started to defy their teachers. So we had assaults and attacks on teachers and adults increase. So its not really a requiremet its just the way it pans out. Any action we do or dont do will have a reaction and consequence. Because we didn't have a clear set of guidelines it lead to other problems which we have to address now.

I don't intend to provide a structure for you, I'm simply telling you that non-religious systems like non-religious people have values too and their systems present those values and prohibits what they consider bad. An example is religious tyranny.

fair enough.

A non-religious system is not defined by the statement "a system without any clear and strong common guidelines". As I've said before, non-religious people have beliefs about what is right and wrong to. You don't think we have values?

Yes they do and i said this before. I am not saying that non religious people dont have morals or values. I am not talking about individuals. Do you agree with the censorship laws for say the internet for example that it allows access to porn and the young people can have access. They can be subjected to predators because its an open access medium. Do you agree with how the government or censorship has positioned this at the moment. Do you agree with the legalization of pot. These are just two examples of what i am talking about as far as that even though you and other individuals can have morals as a society you are still subject to the ideals of others. Those ideals are allowed because they have to be allowed because thats what a free society is. The right to equal access of promote yourself or what you believe. So in this sense things are allowed that may not be good for everyone but you have to accept that as its part of society. Sure you can switch off the internet but its there 24/7 and its something we hope our kids wont be influenced by. But our own leaders and people in positions that represent us are allowing things like unbridled porn that can be accessed by anyone and we cant do much about it.

Well whether or not the best way to avoid getting diseases etc is abstinence or that abstinence is very good for that reason is an opinion, it's your opinion. People have different beliefs on how to manage what they believe is should or not happen. Abortion is a classic case, whether or not abortion is sinful or evil or bad is your personal opinion or chosen values.

Its more than my opinion. Its has been proven that these are the consequences of that behavior whether its right or wrong is another issue.
But this is what I am talking about with how many things have to be included. Here you are arguing that it is my oponion and others will have different oponions. You question whether or not it is the cause and whether its the best way to do things and that others may have a different approach. This is the very thing I mean that society has to include all opinions and cant say no this is wrong or that should be done. So the end result is its allowed to go on. But we know that sleeping around has consequences like STDs and relationship breakdowns that cause other problems.

That casual sex and breakups are provide negative things is your belief, all you're really doing is displaying your value system here, not showing why anyone should agree with it or why a different one is bad or non existent. Different ones do exist the fact that they exist and have their own parameters proves non-religious systems can do provide structures of their own.

Fair enough but i think its more than my value system here. Apart from values and morals we know that how we treat each other in relationships has an effect on our well being and health. Breakdowns in relationships causing negative effects isn't my belief. Its the findings of experts and can have an effect on people. ONce again I am not advocating that someone should take on what I believe to solve this at the moment. I am merely trying to establish that what we deem acceptable or not acceptable will have an effect. That we have to allow for a variety of opinions in society because there is a variety of values. Because we have to allow this it can undermine the system of trying to establish a solid foundation for doing things.

No it's not just that way, pot is being legalized in cities and states in America. But you are the one who is providing that the non-religious can't oppose anything, not me. We can and do oppose things. We do have beliefs.

I am not saying you cant oppose things. I am saying that even if there are things you oppose they can still be implemented and you will still have to be subjected to what their effects will be. All those who didn't want the pot legalized may have protested but they still implemented it. The health care worker that have to deal with the fall out of psychosis may have objected but they still have to deal with the problems. Now some will have said its ok to smoke pot and others said its no good. But the big business won out in the end as it was going to bring the money in. So everyone is subjected to commerical motivations rather than health ones.

Oh I'm sure it is but non-religious people don't commonly think that's the goal, that's what religious people think is the goal. Again you're saying our system is inadequate because it isn't the same as your own. Do you see that?

I can see that but thats not what I am saying. I am trying to establish what is at the moment without a remedy as yet. I know from experieb=nce I would even attempt to suggest that any religious approach was the answer as it would be rejected straight away. I wouldn't dare as I would be shot down. I work in community care services so i have a multi faceted approach and i certainly dont preach my beliefs as the answer to my clients. I take a practical approach. Obviously my personal beliefs influence how i see things but there is more than one way to skin a cat and the lord can work in mysterious ways.

I was simply providing that non-religious people can care as much about integrity as anyone else does and so integrity isn't an issue here.

yes I agree. In fact a religious person who is hypocritical or betrays their beliefs and the people they care for can be deemed much more worse than any non religious person when it comes to integrity.

Nah... I'm not accepting that part and this a clear example of how we our moral systems are very different and how my moral systems are existing.

I can understand how you feel towards the church and religion. I dont blame you with what has happened in the church and religions. But this is not being a Christian as far as I'm concerned. There maybe good Christians in amongst many churches and they are not represented by the bad things that have happened. Its the same for society and there are many good people with values as much as religious people. Our views are different but maybe our values are not so different. Its just a difference in how we approach implementing them into everyday living. Thats the beauty that we can differ and i cant force my beliefs onto you and I have the right to not have to live according to societies ways.

I know these concepts already. To me these concepts provide that you really have no desire or hope for goodness in this world short of our complete conversion, no matter how good we act, if we are not Christians you will never respect us or regard us as equals and you will insist that we are evil and you will expect us to do evil and you will believe that we are capable of not being evil... so your testimony of wanting good in this world is completely untrue seeing that you don't even believe many people will accept you or be born again. You believe that few will be saved. You have no expectation that this world will ever be good.

No thats where you are wrong. As a Christian I believe that its not so black and white as that. Jesus said anyone who gives a person a drink who is thirsty is giving me a drink. So anyone who is kind and helping someone like this to me has a heart after Christ. They dont have to go to church or conform to the stereotypical religious person. In fact Christ often said those who look the part and stand there showing everyone how holy they are will be last into the kingdom of heaven and I will not know them. Their hearts are not really with me.

This isn't what you've provided so far, you've been arguing that no system other than religious ones would even prohibit anything. You've been arguing for the necessity of a religious system.

Not necessarily. I havnt said that we need any particular religious sytem. well i havnt really gone on about it. It has been more to do with trying to establish that many of the ways we do things now are not working. I havnt really offered a solution. You have to establish the issues that are there first before you can come up with solutions.

No I'm very directly referring to Jesus when he said that no one will enter heaven unless they are born again, that he is the only source of truth of goodness and that one day he will cast all goats into blazing furnace where they are destroyed either literally or figuratively. Jesus insists that his way is the only way and he will destroy all who disagree with him and all who are contrary to him in hell one day, in addition to the countless murders he committed in the OT. Jesus does not provide peace or tolerance, he tolerates nothing and he intends to kill every human being that is different than him.

No well I havnt said anything about that. I think that is more to do with your own attitudes towards religion. I know this can be the stereotype belief that some have but I am not advocating that. Besides thats another whole subject that can be debated and discussed and i think I am running out of words limits.

You don't seem to know you bible very well. Sure he claims to love us, but that just means he's confused, it doesn't mean he actually does.

There are many references to Jesus being kind and caring for others. This judgmental this is totally misunderstood but like i said thats for another time. You obviously dont like religion, But all I can say is dont judge everyone the same.

You yourself said this world is not your home, you don't need to feel sorry for me wanting you to leave, you said that is what you want.

I never said that is what I want in the way you are referring. But at this stage we can both have our points of view. I cant push my beliefs onto you and you have the right to feel the way you do.

 

[JGG]

Religious theocrats? Did someone just commit a Merriam Webster's felony? :-0 ;-)

I know, I cringed a bit writing it. I just wanted to make sure it was absolutely clear.