Atheists: Why don't you steal, rape, pillage, etc?

[Paulos23]

My whole point with this is there is no Earthly logic in self-denial if you want something and can get away with taking it, whether it is a woman you want, a car you want, or money you want.

There is empathy with and for others. If you don't have that, I am sorry for you.

If what is stopping you from doing those things is belief in a powerful lawgiver, just keep on believing.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

My whole point with this is there is no Earthly logic in self-denial if you want something and can get away with taking it, whether it is a woman you want, a car you want, or money you want

Some people find great value in sticking to their virtues. Good for the sake of being good, as it were. I would say it's much more satisfying to work and achieve all these things you mentioned, legitimately. I don't want a woman who is my slave, I want a girl who loves me just as much as I love her. I don't want to steal a car, I think it's more satisfying to work and buy one myself. I don't want to steal money, I want to earn a living. Many people are able to find value in doing these things alone without the promise of an external reward (or punishment). I think it's sad if you don't.

You can as FullEnglishBrekkie said of himself, say that you are afraid of the consequences, but this again illogically ignores my question because I said in a scenario in which you can get away with it. Like how many smash stores and take TVs during a riot. They are being quite logical in the Atheist sense that it is 99% likely they will get away with it and they don't have much to lose.

That's just it. The scenario you gave is an illogical one because it depends on a complete breakdown of society. We created a society where it is very hard to get away with doing whatever you want. We did this purposely to prevent people from doing whatever they want. Unless there are riots happening all over the world, in every city of every country all the time, you aren't going to get a huge band of lawless people doing whatever they want. It is an unrealistic scenario.

It is only when you are religious, and believe that you will be punished in the afterlife that it can become logical for you to deny the short-term self-interest of this world in favor of the long-term (eternal) self-interest in the next.

Well that sounds like a very selfish reason to do good. You're only worried about yourself and your own personal (eternal) safety here. How does that make you better than the "selfish" atheist again?

If you can just admit you don't resist self-interest out of logical reasons, but out of illogical emotional reasons then I won't have any problem with that. The problem is it seems Atheists are incapable of saying that because they think they pride themselves on being "smarter" and more "logical" than believers (to think they know FOR SURE what we believe in, does not exist).

I have never claimed that what you believe in doesn't exist. I don't even know what you believe in. All I know is what I believe. I know that I have never seen evidence to support the various different gods people believe in. This could include yours as well but I'll leave it up to you to evidence your claims. Until then, I have no reason to seriously consider or accept it as truth. That doesn't make me smarter or in any way better than you. I just am not convinced that you have any deeper understanding of the nature of reality than anybody else I've encountered.

 

[derGroßmütige]

The fact that you run a business and presumably hold some position of political power is very concerning given that, clearly, ethics means nothing to you unless it is firmly tethered to religion.

Yes, it is always concerning to secular progressives whenever anyone with an opposing view has influence in a society. Gotta shut them up, eh?

Without religion, it seems that you would happily exploit those you do business with.

I have never frauded anyone, but I wasn't in business back when I was an atheist (I grew out of that), but I have however been frauded by numerous people in business, one time nearly forced me into bankruptcy.

I find that most people who are "humanist" or so trusting of human nature, have not had to deal with the seedier sides of life. If you run a business as I do, you basically have to expect fraud in this modern age (and it's gotten MUCH worse, a handshake used to MEAN something now it's a joke). I pretty much anticipate half of the people I do deals with to attempt to cheat and fraud me out of my money at some point. And so far, that's still been underestimating human depravity!

And that's just business. Don't get me started on politics. But as bad as the politicians are, the people they represent can be worse.

If people are so good and can control their immorality without God then explain the rising adultery rates? Over 70% of people are cheating on their spouses, in the past 20 years alone, women's cheating rates have risen over 40%. What changed? We've become "secular humanists". The human race is nothing to worship. Be a police captain for a day in the big city near me and you'll see what human nature really is. There's so many suburban armchair atheists here who love to talk about "humanism" and their solidarity, but they have not seen the real world up close.

Come to the mental hospitals in my area, or the alternative schools, or the inner city streets. My aunt was stabbed to death on the street. My sister had to run away from a rapist. My other sibling's S.O. was raped by her uncle and the trauma made their relationship fall apart. The world I was talking about is not some hypothetical thing, it IS our world. People do rape, steal, and murder, and unless they understand there will be SEVERE consequences they won't stop. And the irony here is that secular atheists often want to do away with the death penalty, so they don't want consequences in THIS life and then they are active on forums like here trying to get people to believe there will be NO consequences in the NEXT life. It's insane...

1 out of 6 American women have been raped, and HALF of them before they were adults and usually by relatives or family friends. About 15% of men in most states are felons. Millions of Americans are manic or bipolar. If you're an atheist you should understand human nature a bit better before following this blind secular humanism, and instead understand humans need consequences for bad actions. And often times, justice is lacking in this world, so we must appeal to people by warning them of punishment in the next life if they do us wrong.

My whole point that LOGIC is the only consideration is particularly true when over 12 million Americans are sociopaths with literally NO CONSCIENCE. So you all talk about "feelings", "empathy" and so forth but those arguments don't work on 12 million of us. There's another 4 million who are psychopaths on top of that. Then there are roughly another 25 million who just ignore their consciences and commit felonys, rape, murder, and steal.

To me, that suggests that you don't care enough about the wellbeing of others to treat them humanely, unless you perceive that you are commanded to. I don't mean to be rude, but to me this suggests a deeper problem.

I don't treat people "humanely" (what the hell is that? some sort of cult?), I treat them well. I've never cheated, in either business or love, but unlike Atheists who want to think it is their own achievement, I know I am a fallen creature and it is only by the grace of God that I was able to overcome sexual desires, greed, wrath, envy,etc. and other NATURAL desires and be a loyal, kind person. And for the last part, I think you do mean to be rude when you attempt to malign my character. But you know what? I admit that the baser, fleshly desires of this vessel we call our bodies are indeed a "deep problem", but it's a problem EVERY human has.

Like an Alcoholic, Workaholic, Anger, Overeaters, Sexaholic, etc. the only way most of them ever solve that problem is by admitting you have the problem and trusting in a higher power (and you may try to malign Alcoholics Anonymous and the other groups but they are the ONLY ones that ever work for most people who struggle with their flaws). The sad thing is most atheist I know usually "look down" on those groups and the people in them as "weak" (kind of Darwinian) and if they struggle with things themselves they are not going to be able to get the support they need.

 

[derGroßmütige]

There is empathy with and for others. If you don't have that, I am sorry for you.

If what is stopping you from doing those things is belief in a powerful lawgiver, just keep on believing.

Over 17 million American sociopaths and psychopaths do NOT have that however. Another 25 million Americans have it, but choose to ignore it and choose to steal, rape, and murder you anyways. And you don't need to feel sorry: I do have it, but I also have other human emotions: wrath, gluttony, envy, pride, etc. I choose to embrace the good and not to embrace the bad because of my religion. You, too, have those emotions. I am glad that you've been given some strong emotional obligation to the human race that prevents you from furthering your own self-interest at other's expense. Thank God for that!

I would just warn all atheists here that 17 million Americans do not have this "empathy" thing you speak of, and another 25 million have it but choose to ignore it and will need fear of consequences, like the death penalty most Atheists want to do away with or a belief in eternal punishment that Atheists want to remove from their minds. Most of those sociopaths are law-abiding citizens only thanks to the fact they believe in an after-life with punishment, or have some level of fear of the law-enforcers.

 

[derGroßmütige]

Some people find great value in sticking to their virtues. Good for the sake of being good, as it were. I would say it's much more satisfying to work and achieve all these things you mentioned, legitimately. I don't want a woman who is my slave, I want a girl who loves me just as much as I love her. I don't want to steal a car, I think it's more satisfying to work and buy one myself. I don't want to steal money, I want to earn a living. Many people are able to find value in doing these things alone without the promise of an external reward (or punishment). I think it's sad if you don't.

You're probably in your twenties and haven't learned hardship yet. Let me guess still in the suburbs? It's easy to say those things when you've had luxury handed to you your whole life, and haven't been starving. Also, how do you know you don't want a slave? You haven't lived in a society where slavery was not taboo, was rampant, and been offered the opportunity to purchase one or inherit one. Most Americans are descended of slave-owners and it was ONLY because of those "Puritans" atheists hate so much, that Abolitionism grew and abolished slavery.

Now that I think about it you unwittingly handed me a great example. For all of mankind's history there has been slavery until a bunch of Christians decided it was wrong and Protestant Britain became the "world policeman" and sent ships to patrol the Atlantic to stop the slave trade. If a people are atheist there is no reason for them to end the practice and harm their own financial self-interest, and indeed they never did end it until religious "fanatics" forced them to. The very "libertarian" let-people-do-what-they-want mindset was created by Thomas Jefferson, a man who owned hundreds of slaves and raped a 14 year old black slave.

That's just it. The scenario you gave is an illogical one because it depends on a complete breakdown of society. We created a society where it is very hard to get away with doing whatever you want. We did this purposely to prevent people from doing whatever they want. Unless there are riots happening all over the world, in every city of every country all the time, you aren't going to get a huge band of lawless people doing whatever they want. It is an unrealistic scenario.

You prove my point, it's the Judeo-Christian society that developed this system of rules and laws, based on our Ten Commandments. Or a different religion (Buddhism,etc.) in other societies. Atheism cannot set down an absolute standard of good and evil. It only has abstract moral values that shift with public sentiment.

It's why every civilization that developed at the beginning of time had a religion that gave it structure. Funny, there were thousands upon thousands of civilizations and never ONE Atheist civilization until Communism (which is responsible for the most mass deaths of any idea in history).

Well that sounds like a very selfish reason to do good. You're only worried about yourself and your own personal (eternal) safety here. How does that make you better than the "selfish" atheist again?

I never said I was better. But you have to admit that if you are an atheist, living in poverty, and you have an opportunity to join say, a group of hackers who can steal millions, or a slaver band and live plentifully, why not?

I have never claimed that what you believe in doesn't exist. I don't even know what you believe in. All I know is what I believe. I know that I have never seen evidence to support the various different gods people believe in. This could include yours as well but I'll leave it up to you to evidence your claims. Until then, I have no reason to seriously consider or accept it as truth. That doesn't make me smarter or in any way better than you. I just am not convinced that you have any deeper understanding of the nature of reality than anybody else I've encountered.

Then basically there is no point for you to be on these forums. You won't ever "seriously consider" anyone here's viewpoint. So you're basically a "Missionary" for Atheism. Which is insane... why waste this life, YOUR ONLY LIFE, to argue about something that doesn't exist? What compels you deep in your soul to want to argue the greater meaning of life and waste away opportunities you could have to indulge in pleasurable experiences?!

 

[Eudaimonist]

What compels you deep in your soul to want to argue the greater meaning of life and waste away opportunities you could have to indulge in pleasurable experiences?!

While I'm not a hedonist, philosophical discussion does happen to be pleasurable to me. So, by your hedonistic standards, I have no reason to be elsewhere.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yes, it is always concerning to secular progressives whenever anyone with an opposing view has influence in a society. Gotta shut them up, eh?

That's not at all what I said. I said that it's concerning because, clearly, ethics means nothing to you unless it is firmly tethered to religion.

If people are so good and can control their immorality without God then explain the rising adultery rates? Over 70% of people are cheating on their spouses, in the past 20 years alone, women's cheating rates have risen over 40%. What changed? We've become "secular humanists".

Why do you attribute this to the rise of secular humanism?

The human race is nothing to worship.

Humanists don't worship the human race.

Be a police captain for a day in the big city near me and you'll see what human nature really is. There's so many suburban armchair atheists here who love to talk about "humanism" and their solidarity, but they have not seen the real world up close.

Come to the mental hospitals in my area, or the alternative schools, or the inner city streets.

What makes you think I haven't seen the "real world" up close? You know next to nothing about me.

My aunt was stabbed to death on the street. My sister had to run away from a rapist. My other sibling's S.O. was raped by her uncle and the trauma made their relationship fall apart. The world I was talking about is not some hypothetical thing, it IS our world. People do rape, steal, and murder, and unless they understand there will be SEVERE consequences they won't stop. And the irony here is that secular atheists often want to do away with the death penalty, so they don't want consequences in THIS life and then they are active on forums like here trying to get people to believe there will be NO consequences in the NEXT life. It's insane...

Given that, apparently, the only thing stopping you from raping, stealing, and murdering is religion, I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the high horse. You might fall off and it's far to fall...

My whole point that LOGIC is the only consideration is particularly true when over 12 million Americans are sociopaths with literally NO CONSCIENCE. So you all talk about "feelings", "empathy" and so forth but those arguments don't work on 12 million of us. There's another 4 million who are psychopaths on top of that. Then there are roughly another 25 million who just ignore their consciences and commit felonys, rape, murder, and steal.

How will religion make them moral? They can just as easily ignore whatever religion has to say about their behaviour. And did you mean to include yourself in that category by saying "12 million of us"?

I don't treat people "humanely" (what the hell is that? some sort of cult?), I treat them well. I've never cheated, in either business or love, but unlike Atheists who want to think it is their own achievement, I know I am a fallen creature and it is only by the grace of God that I was able to overcome sexual desires, greed, wrath, envy,etc. and other NATURAL desires and be a loyal, kind person. And for the last part, I think you do mean to be rude when you attempt to malign my character. But you know what? I admit that the baser, fleshly desires of this vessel we call our bodies are indeed a "deep problem", but it's a problem EVERY human has.

No, not every human would rape, kill, and steal if it weren't for religion. That's your problem. You are projecting your own flaws onto others.

 

[Oafman]

Didn't think this thread could get more crazy. As usual I was wrong.

 

[HitchSlap]

This guy has some issues. I pray he stays Christian, otherwise he may become unhinged.

 

[bhsmte]

This guy has some issues. I pray he stays Christian, otherwise he may become unhinged.

I think of the expression; "house of cards".

 

[derGroßmütige]

That's not at all what I said. I said that it's concerning because, clearly, ethics means nothing to you unless it is firmly tethered to religion.

Of course. That is illogical. Every animal EXCEPT homo sapiens has always organized itself based on strength, and strength alone, as the determining factor for social hierarchy. You don't see lions being all polite when they kill another male and take over their pride and rape their females.

And even in mankind's history, it has been mostly filled with periods of warfare with widespread violence and rape, and it still is today. It's only in the relatively luxurious West (relying on a US dollar credit bubble that will pop when China and the BRICs nations take down the dollar's world reserve currency status) that this delusional bubble of secular multiculturalism thinks that all humans can forever hold hands and there will never be hard times that force the more baser, tribalistic instincts to re-emerge (i.e. Katrina-style chaos). All it takes is a solar flare or an EMP attack and we are back in the stone ages.

And with nothing to unite the West, America in particular, not religion, not language, not ethnicity, nothing, then historical examples of regions with similar characteristics (Africa, Balkans, etc.) show what the result will be: massive civil wars, ethnic cleansing, etc. Unless you want to be a racist and assume those regions are somehow "inferior" and not attribute it to the lack of luxury, poverty, and instability.

Why do you attribute this to the rise of secular humanism?

Because, let's take the adultery example. The West (which is thoroughly secular now) has DRAMATICALLY higher adultery rates than any other part of the world. Secular humanists pushed for removing the punishment for adultery and also have pushed the belief that there won't be divine punishment either. As with the other examples I gave previously (rape, murder, theft), if you take away consequences, then the crime will rise. The stricter parts of the world where it is still criminalized (basically everywhere except the West) have much lower rates of adultery. The top 10 countries for infidelity are all Anglo-European, with the exception of Thailand (a hotspot for foreign europeans who flood it with cash for prostitution, another example of my point of how secularism has corrupted cultures, and in Thailand's case the secular Western corrupt cash has permeated their society and made it almost ungovernable).

Humanists don't worship the human race.

Yes they do.

Humanism, noun: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.

If you are a Christian humanist for example, then you place humans above God, and are committing idolatry.

What makes you think I haven't seen the "real world" up close? You know next to nothing about me.

Okay, enlighten me of your great hard knocks life. Anyone close to you murdered? Family members raped? It's easy to "believe in humanity" with humanism, when you haven't had to patrol the streets and see the wicked up close, when you haven't seen how almost all humans struggle with addictions or vices of some kind, whether drugs, over-eating, alcohol, pornography, pyromania, kleptomania, etc. I sincerely doubt there is a single human who doesn't struggle with addiction.

In fact a majority of men touch to material that implies pedophilia (pornography with titles that include words designed to appeal to that sort of mindset: "young", "teen", "barely 18", "jailbait" and other such terms are prolific in the pornographic industry) and where actresses are taught to lie about their age and say they are "18" instead of their real age, to push that age limit as low as the law will allow (if 17 was legal, all porn would be tailored to 17. If 16, then 16,etc.). If you're a guy, you've probably done so and didn't even realize that it was appealing to that part of yourself.

Join a police task force against sexual predators. Come and WITNESS the real world then come back to me. And I'll admit it's not just the West, it's all humanity's problem: I once was living in Asia for example, and managing an apartment complex there I had access to the internet management system, and I could see what all the tenants were looking at. I was shocked and appalled. What was worse is when I wanted to report it to authorities, I found out their country didn't have laws against this stuff. It's so disturbing because these were young tenants mostly, close to my age at that time, and they were all such polite and friendly people. It's just amazing to me how so much darkness exists in the average person's soul.

Given that, apparently, the only thing stopping you from raping, stealing, and murdering is religion, I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the high horse. You might fall off and it's far to fall...

No, I was an atheist once and I didn't do all that, but I did listen to death metal, get in fights a lot (I was a teenager) and extreme ideologies had greater appeal (atheists have a greater percentage of adherents to Communism/Fascism/Libertarianism than other beliefs), and I'm sure I would not have been as productive a member of society.

How will religion make them moral? They can just as easily ignore whatever religion has to say about their behaviour. And did you mean to include yourself in that category by saying "12 million of us"?

Sincere religious beliefs. I am not talking insincere ones. No, read the sentence, I was talking about "us" Americans, of which 12 million have no empathy, and pointing out how dangerous it is for Atheists to act as missionaries and remove fear of consequences (both by removing a belief in divine punishment and their general advocacy against the death penalty) from those 12 million people.

No, not every human would rape, kill, and steal if it weren't for religion. That's your problem. You are projecting your own flaws onto others.

Read a history book. I agree, some bold, usually religiously principled (i.e. Stauffenberg, Goerdeler, Tresckow etc.) might stand up against the evil masses, but as history has shown, the masses go along with evil generally (Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc.). As Tresckow said, "A man's moral worth is established only at the point where he is ready to give his life in defense of his convictions."

And why would an atheist give up their only life, to oppose "evil", when Atheists don't believe anything is "good" or "evil"? An Atheist cannot even truly call Stalin or Hitler "evil", and cannot even call the Holocaust "evil", because they cannot establish any absolute standard of morality, and even Hitler has apologists who will claim he acted "morally" and Atheists cannot point to a spiritual authority that has decided what is "good" or "evil". And if someone is not evil, then why die to oppose them? Take it from the leader who almost did kill Hitler:

"We took this challenge before our Lord and our conscience, and it must be done, because this man, Hitler, he is the ultimate evil." - Claus von Stauffenberg

I would reiterate that in a slightly modified form. If you only believe that we are just flesh and bones, and do not have a soul, then there is no such thing as evil. It is some chemical in the brain responsible, not an "evil" soul. So you can at best call Hitler "misguided" perhaps, or say you "disagree" with his methods or aims.

This is why it was only the Christians who risked their lives in attempting to assassinate Hitler, besides a few lone Communists who were already marked for death (so it was a matter of survival at that point) and who themselves were basically advocating a violent dictatorship (Stalin, Lenin, and Mao killed even more than Hitler).

This guy has some issues. I pray he stays Christian, otherwise he may become unhinged.

My only issue is it becomes frustrating when you deflect and resort to Ad Hominem instead of really trying to understand my points and give them serious consideration.

 

[bhsmte]

Of course. That is illogical. Every animal EXCEPT homo sapiens has always organized itself based on strength, and strength alone, as the determining factor for social hierarchy. You don't see lions being all polite when they kill another male and take over their pride and rape their females.

And even in mankind's history, it has been mostly filled with periods of warfare with widespread violence and rape, and it still is today. It's only in the relatively luxurious West (relying on a US dollar credit bubble that will pop when China and the BRICs nations take down the dollar's world reserve currency status) that this delusional bubble of secular multiculturalism thinks that all humans can forever hold hands and there will never be hard times that force the more baser, tribalistic instincts to re-emerge (i.e. Katrina-style chaos). All it takes is a solar flare or an EMP attack and we are back in the stone ages.

And with nothing to unite the West, America in particular, not religion, not language, not ethnicity, nothing, then historical examples of regions with similar characteristics (Africa, Balkans, etc.) show what the result will be: massive civil wars, ethnic cleansing, etc. Unless you want to be a racist and assume those regions are somehow "inferior" and not attribute it to the lack of luxury, poverty, and instability.



Because, let's take the adultery example. The West (which is thoroughly secular now) has DRAMATICALLY higher adultery rates than any other part of the world. Secular humanists pushed for removing the punishment for adultery and also have pushed the belief that there won't be divine punishment either. As with the other examples I gave previously (rape, murder, theft), if you take away consequences, then the crime will rise. The stricter parts of the world where it is still criminalized (basically everywhere except the West) have much lower rates of adultery. The top 10 countries for infidelity are all Anglo-European, with the exception of Thailand (a hotspot for foreign europeans who flood it with cash for prostitution, another example of my point of how secularism has corrupted cultures, and in Thailand's case the secular Western corrupt cash has permeated their society and made it almost ungovernable).



Yes they do.

Humanism, noun: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.

If you are a Christian humanist for example, then you place humans above God, and are committing idolatry.



Okay, enlighten me of your great hard knocks life. Anyone close to you murdered? Family members raped? It's easy to "believe in humanity" with humanism, when you haven't had to patrol the streets and see the wicked up close, when you haven't seen how almost all humans struggle with addictions or vices of some kind, whether drugs, over-eating, alcohol, pornography, pyromania, kleptomania, etc. I sincerely doubt there is a single human who doesn't struggle with addiction.

In fact a majority of men touch to material that implies pedophilia (pornography with titles that include words designed to appeal to that sort of mindset: "young", "teen", "barely 18", "jailbait" and other such terms are prolific in the pornographic industry) and where actresses are taught to lie about their age and say they are "18" instead of their real age, to push that age limit as low as the law will allow (if 17 was legal, all porn would be tailored to 17. If 16, then 16,etc.). If you're a guy, you've probably done so and didn't even realize that it was appealing to that part of yourself.

Join a police task force against sexual predators. Come and WITNESS the real world then come back to me. And I'll admit it's not just the West, it's all humanity's problem: I once was living in Asia for example, and managing an apartment complex there I had access to the internet management system, and I could see what all the tenants were looking at. I was shocked and appalled. What was worse is when I wanted to report it to authorities, I found out their country didn't have laws against this stuff. It's so disturbing because these were young tenants mostly, close to my age at that time, and they were all such polite and friendly people. It's just amazing to me how so much darkness exists in the average person's soul.



No, I was an atheist once and I didn't do all that, but I did listen to death metal, get in fights a lot (I was a teenager) and extreme ideologies had greater appeal (atheists have a greater percentage of adherents to Communism/Fascism/Libertarianism than other beliefs), and I'm sure I would not have been as productive a member of society.



Sincere religious beliefs. I am not talking insincere ones. No, read the sentence, I was talking about "us" Americans, of which 12 million have no empathy, and pointing out how dangerous it is for Atheists to act as missionaries and remove fear of consequences (both by removing a belief in divine punishment and their general advocacy against the death penalty) from those 12 million people.



Read a history book. I agree, some bold, usually religiously principled (i.e. Stauffenberg, Goerdeler, Tresckow etc.) might stand up against the evil masses, but as history has shown, the masses go along with evil generally (Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc.). As Tresckow said, "A man's moral worth is established only at the point where he is ready to give his life in defense of his convictions."

And why would an atheist give up their only life, to oppose "evil", when Atheists don't believe anything is "good" or "evil"? An Atheist cannot even truly call Stalin or Hitler "evil", and cannot even call the Holocaust "evil", because they cannot establish any absolute standard of morality, and even Hitler has apologists who will claim he acted "morally" and Atheists cannot point to a spiritual authority that has decided what is "good" or "evil". And if someone is not evil, then why die to oppose them? Take it from the leader who almost did kill Hitler:

"We took this challenge before our Lord and our conscience, and it must be done, because this man, Hitler, he is the ultimate evil." - Claus von Stauffenberg

I would reiterate that in a slightly modified form. If you only believe that we are just flesh and bones, and do not have a soul, then there is no such thing as evil. It is some chemical in the brain responsible, not an "evil" soul. So you can at best call Hitler "misguided" perhaps, or say you "disagree" with his methods or aims.

This is why it was only the Christians who risked their lives in attempting to assassinate Hitler, besides a few lone Communists who were already marked for death (so it was a matter of survival at that point) and who themselves were basically advocating a violent dictatorship (Stalin, Lenin, and Mao killed even more than Hitler).



My only issue is it becomes frustrating when you deflect and resort to Ad Hominem instead of really trying to understand my points and give them serious consideration.

I have considered your points and I can only say this; I am happy I don't agree with them.

 

[HitchSlap]

Of course. That is illogical. Every animal EXCEPT homo sapiens has always organized itself based on strength, and strength alone, as the determining factor for social hierarchy. You don't see lions being all polite when they kill another male and take over their pride and rape their females.

And even in mankind's history, it has been mostly filled with periods of warfare with widespread violence and rape, and it still is today. It's only in the relatively luxurious West (relying on a US dollar credit bubble that will pop when China and the BRICs nations take down the dollar's world reserve currency status) that this delusional bubble of secular multiculturalism thinks that all humans can forever hold hands and there will never be hard times that force the more baser, tribalistic instincts to re-emerge (i.e. Katrina-style chaos). All it takes is a solar flare or an EMP attack and we are back in the stone ages.

And with nothing to unite the West, America in particular, not religion, not language, not ethnicity, nothing, then historical examples of regions with similar characteristics (Africa, Balkans, etc.) show what the result will be: massive civil wars, ethnic cleansing, etc. Unless you want to be a racist and assume those regions are somehow "inferior" and not attribute it to the lack of luxury, poverty, and instability.



Because, let's take the adultery example. The West (which is thoroughly secular now) has DRAMATICALLY higher adultery rates than any other part of the world. Secular humanists pushed for removing the punishment for adultery and also have pushed the belief that there won't be divine punishment either. As with the other examples I gave previously (rape, murder, theft), if you take away consequences, then the crime will rise. The stricter parts of the world where it is still criminalized (basically everywhere except the West) have much lower rates of adultery. The top 10 countries for infidelity are all Anglo-European, with the exception of Thailand (a hotspot for foreign europeans who flood it with cash for prostitution, another example of my point of how secularism has corrupted cultures, and in Thailand's case the secular Western corrupt cash has permeated their society and made it almost ungovernable).



Yes they do.

Humanism, noun: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.

If you are a Christian humanist for example, then you place humans above God, and are committing idolatry.



Okay, enlighten me of your great hard knocks life. Anyone close to you murdered? Family members raped? It's easy to "believe in humanity" with humanism, when you haven't had to patrol the streets and see the wicked up close, when you haven't seen how almost all humans struggle with addictions or vices of some kind, whether drugs, over-eating, alcohol, pornography, pyromania, kleptomania, etc. I sincerely doubt there is a single human who doesn't struggle with addiction.

In fact a majority of men touch to material that implies pedophilia (pornography with titles that include words designed to appeal to that sort of mindset: "young", "teen", "barely 18", "jailbait" and other such terms are prolific in the pornographic industry) and where actresses are taught to lie about their age and say they are "18" instead of their real age, to push that age limit as low as the law will allow (if 17 was legal, all porn would be tailored to 17. If 16, then 16,etc.). If you're a guy, you've probably done so and didn't even realize that it was appealing to that part of yourself.

Join a police task force against sexual predators. Come and WITNESS the real world then come back to me. And I'll admit it's not just the West, it's all humanity's problem: I once was living in Asia for example, and managing an apartment complex there I had access to the internet management system, and I could see what all the tenants were looking at. I was shocked and appalled. What was worse is when I wanted to report it to authorities, I found out their country didn't have laws against this stuff. It's so disturbing because these were young tenants mostly, close to my age at that time, and they were all such polite and friendly people. It's just amazing to me how so much darkness exists in the average person's soul.



No, I was an atheist once and I didn't do all that, but I did listen to death metal, get in fights a lot (I was a teenager) and extreme ideologies had greater appeal (atheists have a greater percentage of adherents to Communism/Fascism/Libertarianism than other beliefs), and I'm sure I would not have been as productive a member of society.



Sincere religious beliefs. I am not talking insincere ones. No, read the sentence, I was talking about "us" Americans, of which 12 million have no empathy, and pointing out how dangerous it is for Atheists to act as missionaries and remove fear of consequences (both by removing a belief in divine punishment and their general advocacy against the death penalty) from those 12 million people.



Read a history book. I agree, some bold, usually religiously principled (i.e. Stauffenberg, Goerdeler, Tresckow etc.) might stand up against the evil masses, but as history has shown, the masses go along with evil generally (Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc.). As Tresckow said, "A man's moral worth is established only at the point where he is ready to give his life in defense of his convictions."

And why would an atheist give up their only life, to oppose "evil", when Atheists don't believe anything is "good" or "evil"? An Atheist cannot even truly call Stalin or Hitler "evil", and cannot even call the Holocaust "evil", because they cannot establish any absolute standard of morality, and even Hitler has apologists who will claim he acted "morally" and Atheists cannot point to a spiritual authority that has decided what is "good" or "evil". And if someone is not evil, then why die to oppose them? Take it from the leader who almost did kill Hitler:

"We took this challenge before our Lord and our conscience, and it must be done, because this man, Hitler, he is the ultimate evil." - Claus von Stauffenberg

I would reiterate that in a slightly modified form. If you only believe that we are just flesh and bones, and do not have a soul, then there is no such thing as evil. It is some chemical in the brain responsible, not an "evil" soul. So you can at best call Hitler "misguided" perhaps, or say you "disagree" with his methods or aims.

This is why it was only the Christians who risked their lives in attempting to assassinate Hitler, besides a few lone Communists who were already marked for death (so it was a matter of survival at that point) and who themselves were basically advocating a violent dictatorship (Stalin, Lenin, and Mao killed even more than Hitler).



My only issue is it becomes frustrating when you deflect and resort to Ad Hominem instead of really trying to understand my points and give them serious consideration.

Submitted for your consideration: Why do majority secular nations have substantially lower murders, rapes, violent crimes, theft, and generally safer societies and higher quality of life as compared to the most "religious" countries?

 

[Oafman]

dG, you make a lot of unsupported assertions. For example, atheists being more likely to follow extreme political ideologies. Or most men view pornography that implies paedophilia.

Would you mind providing convincing citations for such assertions in future? Because otherwise we could all be forgiven for thinking that you're just making it up.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Of course. That is illogical. Every animal EXCEPT homo sapiens has always organized itself based on strength, and strength alone, as the determining factor for social hierarchy. You don't see lions being all polite when they kill another male and take over their pride and rape their females.

We are not lions.

And even in mankind's history, it has been mostly filled with periods of warfare with widespread violence and rape, and it still is today. It's only in the relatively luxurious West (relying on a US dollar credit bubble that will pop when China and the BRICs nations take down the dollar's world reserve currency status) that this delusional bubble of secular multiculturalism thinks that all humans can forever hold hands and there will never be hard times that force the more baser, tribalistic instincts to re-emerge (i.e. Katrina-style chaos). All it takes is a solar flare or an EMP attack and we are back in the stone ages.

And with nothing to unite the West, America in particular, not religion, not language, not ethnicity, nothing, then historical examples of regions with similar characteristics (Africa, Balkans, etc.) show what the result will be: massive civil wars, ethnic cleansing, etc. Unless you want to be a racist and assume those regions are somehow "inferior" and not attribute it to the lack of luxury, poverty, and instability.

How has religion ever prevented this from occurring? You allude to the Balkans, and presumably the breakup of Yugoslavia, where Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croats, and Muslim Bosnians weren't restrained from violence by their respective religions. Quite the contrary: many found justification for violence by invoking their faith. "God is with us."

Because, let's take the adultery example. The West (which is thoroughly secular now) has DRAMATICALLY higher adultery rates than any other part of the world. Secular humanists pushed for removing the punishment for adultery and also have pushed the belief that there won't be divine punishment either. As with the other examples I gave previously (rape, murder, theft), if you take away consequences, then the crime will rise. The stricter parts of the world where it is still criminalized (basically everywhere except the West) have much lower rates of adultery. The top 10 countries for infidelity are all Anglo-European, with the exception of Thailand (a hotspot for foreign europeans who flood it with cash for prostitution, another example of my point of how secularism has corrupted cultures, and in Thailand's case the secular Western corrupt cash has permeated their society and made it almost ungovernable).

If you want to examine correlations, then it's also worthwhile noting that the countries that often score highly on various measures of health and happiness also happen to be "secular."

Yes they do.

Humanism, noun: an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters.

If you are a Christian humanist for example, then you place humans above God, and are committing idolatry.

Nope. I don't worship the human race. Worship is something you do. Once again, don't project your flaws onto others.

Okay, enlighten me of your great hard knocks life. Anyone close to you murdered? Family members raped? It's easy to "believe in humanity" with humanism, when you haven't had to patrol the streets and see the wicked up close, when you haven't seen how almost all humans struggle with addictions or vices of some kind, whether drugs, over-eating, alcohol, pornography, pyromania, kleptomania, etc. I sincerely doubt there is a single human who doesn't struggle with addiction.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to share my personal history with you. You have been nothing but rude.

Join a police task force against sexual predators. Come and WITNESS the real world then come back to me.

Again, you know next to nothing about me or what I have witnessed. So please stop this patronising act. It's getting old.

No, I was an atheist once and I didn't do all that, but I did listen to death metal, get in fights a lot (I was a teenager) and extreme ideologies had greater appeal (atheists have a greater percentage of adherents to Communism/Fascism/Libertarianism than other beliefs), and I'm sure I would not have been as productive a member of society.

As I said before, just because you were a jerk as an atheist doesn't mean that all atheists are jerks.

Sincere religious beliefs. I am not talking insincere ones. No, read the sentence, I was talking about "us" Americans, of which 12 million have no empathy, and pointing out how dangerous it is for Atheists to act as missionaries and remove fear of consequences (both by removing a belief in divine punishment and their general advocacy against the death penalty) from those 12 million people.

You didn't answer my question: how will religion make them moral?

And why would an atheist give up their only life, to oppose "evil", when Atheists don't believe anything is "good" or "evil"?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

An Atheist cannot even truly call Stalin or Hitler "evil", and cannot even call the Holocaust "evil", because they cannot establish any absolute standard of morality, and even Hitler has apologists who will claim he acted "morally" and Atheists cannot point to a spiritual authority that has decided what is "good" or "evil".

One need not invoke supernatural forces to make moral claims.

My only issue is it becomes frustrating when you deflect and resort to Ad Hominem instead of really trying to understand my points and give them serious consideration.

Your point is a strawman. I've considered it. It's rubbish.

 

[Oafman]

One more observation.

This thread is deeply offensive to Christians. Actually more so than it is to atheists. Because it implies that Christians only behave well out of fear of punishment, and not simply because they are inherently good people.

 

[Paulos23]

Over 17 million American sociopaths and psychopaths do NOT have that however. Another 25 million Americans have it, but choose to ignore it and choose to steal, rape, and murder you anyways. And you don't need to feel sorry: I do have it, but I also have other human emotions: wrath, gluttony, envy, pride, etc. I choose to embrace the good and not to embrace the bad because of my religion. You, too, have those emotions. I am glad that you've been given some strong emotional obligation to the human race that prevents you from furthering your own self-interest at other's expense. Thank God for that!

I would just warn all atheists here that 17 million Americans do not have this "empathy" thing you speak of, and another 25 million have it but choose to ignore it and will need fear of consequences, like the death penalty most Atheists want to do away with or a belief in eternal punishment that Atheists want to remove from their minds. Most of those sociopaths are law-abiding citizens only thanks to the fact they believe in an after-life with punishment, or have some level of fear of the law-enforcers.

This is why we have police, this is why we have government. To try to protect those that would be a peaceful person from the criminal. It is not perfect, it is full of flaws, but until some all knowing divine police shows up it is the best we got now. The numbers you give (and where do you get those?) is still a minority of the population. If law and order where not here they would be more of a problem.

 

[keith99]

Of course. That is illogical. Every animal EXCEPT homo sapiens has always organized itself based on strength, and strength alone, as the determining factor for social hierarchy. You don't see lions being all polite when they kill another male and take over their pride and rape their females.
...

Bolding mine.

So dogs are not animals!

There was no question of who was the strongest in our pack. It was Joey, the 120 Lb. Presa Canario. There was never any question of what the social hierarchy was either and Joey was the Beta Dog.

And the pack looked out for its weaker members, across species lines.

Seems dogs do far better than the kind of person you associate with.

 

[keith99]

One more observation.

This thread is deeply offensive to Christians. Actually more so than it is to atheists. Because it implies that Christians only behave well out of fear of punishment, and not simply because they are inherently good people.

Or because they choose to follow the example set by their Christ. There are some Christians who do just that and go the extra mile and more following the example set for them.

Thank you for reminding us about that other kind of Christian.

 

[FullEnglishBrekkie]

Come to the mental hospitals in my area, or the alternative schools, or the inner city streets.

There are neurobiological, psychiatric and psychological conditions that can lead to people behaving in ways which do not conform to the neurotypical concept of logic. Some people behave in a way that makes perfect sense to them, even logical in their mode of reasoning, but that way seems illogical to most simply because our brains do not work in the same way as theirs. Not all atheists, or humanists for that matter, are bad, not all Christians are good. Some Christians are atheist and some atheists, therefore, follow a Christian code