Can You At Least Admit that The Act is Wrong?

[TheFathersDaughter]

Outside of religion there is no such thing as right or wrong, there would just be action and reaction. I would be perfectly justified in killing babies and no one would be able to say anything about it.

Wrong. Believe it or not, atheists and the non-religion create their own morals quite easily. For atheists, the purpose of life is to live, and so they must do so to the fullest of extent. They believe they only have one chance. Common sense tells us that someone who murders babies can probably not be trusted. Someone will not marry a person who may murder their first born. An employer won't hire someone who may stab their customers babies. The list goes on. It's foolish to say you can't make morals without religion.

The only possible way you couldn't make morals is without purpose, and everyone has purpose no matter where it comes from.

 

[ReformedChapin]

Wrong. Believe it or not, atheists and the non-religion create their own morals quite easily. For atheists, the purpose of life is to live, and so they must do so to the fullest of extent. They believe they only have one chance. Common sense tells us that someone who murders babies can probably not be trusted. Someone will not marry a person who may murder their first born. An employer won't hire someone who may stab their customers babies. The list goes on. It's foolish to say you can't make morals without religion.

The only possible way you couldn't make morals is without purpose, and everyone has purpose no matter where it comes from.

They can create what ever the heck they want but they cannot justify them rationally. That's what you seem to be missing. They cannot justify the immorality of someone killing babies for fun.

BTW athiest say that there is no purpose in the world yet they create morals. They contradict themselves more than anyone like many other liberals.

 

[TheFathersDaughter]

They can create what ever the heck they want but they cannot justify them rationally. That's what you seem to be missing. They cannot justify me killing babies for fun.

BTW athiest say that there is no purpose in the world yet they create morals. They contradict themselves more than anyone like many other liberals.

NewGuy, you obviously don't know anything about atheism and are confusing extremist disbelief for atheistic truth. Atheists do believe in purpose. They believe the purpose is to make the most out of life and become as successful as you can so that you may be remembered. They don't "make their own purpose". They might fulfill their purpose differently, but their purpose is always the same. Just like in Christianity.

 

[ReformedChapin]

NewGuy, you obviously don't know anything about atheism and are confusing extremist disbelief for atheistic truth. Atheists do believe in purpose. They believe the purpose is to make the most out of life and become as successful as you can so that you may be remembered. They don't "make their own purpose". They might fulfill their purpose differently, but their purpose is always the same. Just like in Christianity.

Actually you don't know how to evalute world views properly. An individual of any faith (yes that includes athiesm) can make any propositions about their system but fail to defend them rationally. If they are honest with themselves like I was since I was an athiest they will see the contradictions in their system and will leave such horrible world views. Here is some categories to evaluate world views:

1) Metaphiscal coherence
2) Ethics
3) Views of God
4) application of logic

Athiest fail in all four since they use logic but cannot justify why they should use it. They cannot justify right or wrong, since they have no moral absolutes in their own system. They say they don't believe in God but yet idealize other things such as sex, money or material objects...yes because we are humans we will live horrible lives unless we live by the most coherent world view which is provided by the Christian system.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

Nope. I am not prejudice against, nor discriminate against gay people. They have equal rights. They can do anything I can do. I cant do anything they cant do. You dont want equal rights - you want additional rights that you dont already have and neither does anybody else (e.g., marrying someone of the same sex).

You are absolutely, flat out, plain WRONG!

I had to go sign some trust documents this morning - not 12 hours ago - in order to ensure the same rights that you would receive by getting a $60 marriage license in King County.

My legal bills over the last 20 years, in order to keep up with you, come to more than $14,000.

Don't you DARE submit that we have equal rights.

If you think we do, then you owe me $13, 940 dollars...then we would be equal.

Give me just ONE good reason why YOU should enjoy SPEACIAL RIGHTS!

 

[Zaac]

You are absolutely, flat out, plain WRONG!

I had to go sign some trust documents this morning - not 12 hours ago - in order to ensure the same rights that you would receive by getting a $60 marriage license in King County.

My legal bills over the last 20 years, in order to keep up with you, come to more than $14,000.

Don't you DARE submit that we have equal rights.

If you think we do, then you owe me $13, 940 dollars...then we would be equal.

Give me just ONE good reason why YOU should enjoy SPEACIAL RIGHTS!

What special rights though? I don't have a legal right to marry a person of the same-sex either.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

What special rights though? I don't have a legal right to marry a person of the same-sex either.

You have the right to marry the person of your choice.

I do not.

Your argument is silly.

 

[brightmorningstar]

No, no-one has the choice to marry the person of their choice, the person of my choice didnt want to marry me... I believe God has found the right person for me.

BUT some in my fellowship have never had the chance to marry the person of their choice.
Anyway nothing is stopping anyone being in realtionship with whomever they want, but one cant be a Christian as well and claim that because its against what Jesus taught His disciples.
the issue is faith in Jesus Christ for who He is and what He said His followers must seek to do.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

No, no-one has the choice to marry the person of their choice, the person of my choice didnt want to marry me... I believe God has found the right person for me.

BUT some in my fellowship have never had the chance to marry the person of their choice.
Anyway nothing is stopping anyone being in realtionship with whomever they want, but one cant be a Christian as well and claim that because its against what Jesus taught His disciples.
the issue is faith in Jesus Christ for who He is and what He said His followers must seek to do.

God also brought me my partner - and we have lived faithfully for nearly 23 years. It was my choice to take him, and his choice to take me, and God's choice to bless us.

Happy 50th b-day tomorrow. Congratulations on your milestone.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

They can create what ever the heck they want but they cannot justify them rationally. That's what you seem to be missing. They cannot justify the immorality of someone killing babies for fun.

*rolls up her sleeves* Ahem, watch now for a demonstration of a non religious, rational justification for generally accepted morality... watching?

"Moral behaviour is beahviour that is of benefit to the population in which the individual finds himself"

There you go. Thats all there is to morality. You can dress it up in religious terms to try to scare the less inteligent into following the rules blindly, but at the end of the day, thats where morality comes from.

Moral guidance from God comes to help us be beneficial to our societies, not the other way around. Social cohesion is the primary cause and reason for moral perception. Religious obedience is secondary.

 

[Zaac]

You have the right to marry the person of your choice.

I do not.

Your argument is silly.

What argument. You said special rights and I just wanted you to explain how its a special right if NO ONE can do it.

You can marry the person of your choice just like everybody else if you do it within the confines of the law.

If a law is enacted that says same-sex couples can marry, then you go right ahead and marry. Just don't expect God's people to tell ya that it's of God.

But you can let go of the special rights stuff.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

What argument. You said special rights and I just wanted you to explain how its a special right if NO ONE can do it.

You can marry the person of your choice just like everybody else if you do it within the confines of the law.

If a law is enacted that says same-sex couples can marry, then you go right ahead and marry. Just don't expect God's people to tell ya that it's of God.

But you can let go of the special rights stuff.

If you believe this, can you please confirm that you support homosexuals being allowed to get married in the purely secular eyes of the law then?

 

[ReformedChapin]

*rolls up her sleeves* Ahem, watch now for a demonstration of a non religious, rational justification for generally accepted morality... watching?

"Moral behaviour is beahviour that is of benefit to the population in which the individual finds himself"

There you go. Thats all there is to morality. You can dress it up in religious terms to try to scare the less inteligent into following the rules blindly, but at the end of the day, thats where morality comes from.

Moral guidance from God comes to help us be beneficial to our societies, not the other way around. Social cohesion is the primary cause and reason for moral perception. Religious obedience is secondary.

Why should we help sociaty? Maybe by natural selection we should all die out since we affect other species negatively? You like everyone else here keep cheating refering to a standard you cannot justify.
And no, obvidience to God is primary cause for reason and moral preception. You cannot justify why humans or sociaty should continue to exist. And if you want to talk about intellectualism I suggest you look at your world and analyze it since it's a royal mess.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Why should we help sociaty? Maybe by natural selection we should all die out since we affect other species negatively? You like everyone else here keep cheating refering to a standard you cannot justify.
And no, obvidience to God is primary cause for reason and moral preception. You cannot justify why humans or sociaty should continue to exist. And if you want to talk about intellectualism I suggest you look at your world and analyze it since it's a royal mess.

You didn't ask why humans should continuew to exist. You asked for a rational explanation for non religious morality. I provided you with one.

No, I cannot think of any purely logical reason why humans, or indeed life at all, should continue to exist. But I'm rather emotionally attached to my family and friends, so I wohn't be lining up for the suicide booth just yet, but I'm happy to admit this is purely an emotional response, rather than a rational one.

But, from wht I THINK you are saying... yes, morality is governed by natural selection... i.e. morals that promote a form of society most conducive to the production of healthy young are the moral models passed forward... morals that do NOT promote the existance of healthy offspring die out, just like any other non beneficial trait.

 

[Zaac]

God also brought me my partner

In order for God to have joined you as one with another of the same sex, He would have to be a liar.

Is your God a liar?

- and we have lived faithfully for nearly 23 years. It was my choice to take him, and his choice to take me, and God's choice to bless us.

For 23 years, you have lived in direct disobedience. You know Chalice, I would like nothing better than to be able to tell couples like you and your partner that there is nothing wrong with your union, not that you need me to say that. I thoroughly enjoy seeing two people in love and dedicated to each other and genuinely happy.

But as a man of God and a teacher of His Gospel, I cannot espouse a view that runs counter to His Word.

A much as I would like to say be in love with the person of your choosing, my Spirit is ruled by Jesus Christ.And without a doubt, I know that He ordained for a man to be joined with a woman and a woman to be joined with a man because His Word says so.

I, as a man of God, cannot assign anymore rightness to your relationship of 23 years than I can to the relationship of the heterosexual couple who has been living and sleeping together for 23 years.

So as much as one part of me would love to sy Congratulations, the God-led part of me sees 23 years where God had something else planned for you that you missed out on.

I know you probably don't feel the same. But let me ask you, do you trust God? Do you consider yourself a Christian?

 

[MrPirate]

Nope. I am not prejudice against, nor discriminate against gay people. They have equal rights. They can do anything I can do. I cant do anything they cant do. You dont want equal rights - you want additional rights that you dont already have and neither does anybody else (e.g., marrying someone of the same sex).

This is like saying blacks of the 1950’s had equal rights. They had the right to separate schools and separate housing and separate drinking fountains.

Do you really believe segregations was not discrimination?

Do you really believe blacks of that era had “equal” rights just because a few white people lied and said that they were (wink wink nudge nudge) equal?


Gays and lesbians do not have equal rights and pretending otherwise is just dishonest.

The only ones seeking special rights are those seeking the special right to force discrimination on a minority

 

[ReformedChapin]

You didn't ask why humans should continuew to exist. You asked for a rational explanation for non religious morality. I provided you with one.

No, I cannot think of any purely logical reason why humans, or indeed life at all, should continue to exist. But I'm rather emotionally attached to my family and friends, so I wohn't be lining up for the suicide booth just yet, but I'm happy to admit this is purely an emotional response, rather than a rational one.

But, from wht I THINK you are saying... yes, morality is governed by natural selection... i.e. morals that promote a form of society most conducive to the production of healthy young are the moral models passed forward... morals that do NOT promote the existance of healthy offspring die out, just like any other non beneficial trait.

The point is that it's not rational, your world view is based on emotion. It's common in our comtemporary culture where anti-intellectualism is pushed. So why not just admit that? It's based on your non-christian pressupositions.

 

[Zaac]

If you believe this, can you please confirm that you support homosexuals being allowed to get married in the purely secular eyes of the law then?

I'm a Christian. I espouse a Kingdom perspective, not a secular one.

If the authorities of this world say that same-sex people can marry, then get married. Just don't expect that to be accepted in God's Church as the Church should not be accepting of anyone's outright blatant disobedience to God's Word.

Have you seen some of the things that this world has made legal while removing God from public view? I wouldn't be surprised if it does become legal in all states except the Southern ones.

So in the purely secular eyes of the law, you're gonna do whatever you want to because that's the game that seems to be popular right now.

But the people of God are called to a higher standard than secular law.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

In order for God to have joined you as one with another of the same sex, He would have to be a liar.

Is your God a liar?

Nope. No one is necesarily lying here... although the people who extrapolate that simplistic tribal laws of bronze age desert dwellers are applicable to modern urbanised societies may be misguided...

 

[EnemyPartyII]

What non Christian presuppositions? I'm Christian and have been all my life... I'm pretty sure that any pressupositions I have are actually fairly dense with Christian influence... but all that aside... are we still on the same topic?

You asked for a non religious, rational explanation for morality, right?

I provided you with one.

Now you are coming out with stuff about emotional world views and anti-intelectualism... I'm not sure we are talking about the same point anymore.

What do you think I have said that is anti-intellectual?