Mriana Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Not sure where else to put this, so I placed it here. Figure it is as good a place as any, I guess. The way I see it, the woman is deluded and has no clue what she is talking about. The Bible is a very violent book (the Quran is worse) and I cannot see how it can be a basis for morality. It has Stone Age mentality, not to mention the Strong and Vine's Concordance and Dictionary has a ton of reference for stone, stoning, rocks- which obviously shows it is from the Stone Age (yes, I know the Xians here will disagree, but they ought to read their book with more of a critical eye than blind faith and acceptance. I'm sure they will throw stones because I said that, but they should read it more carefully). Hostility to religion bodes ill for society Without belief in a higher truth, people may give way to base impulses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted June 9, 2009 Super Moderator Share Posted June 9, 2009 I don't follow the no god/religion = no morals conclusion. Where do they get that? The basics of living a good life are self evident to most members of humanity. Refraining from killing your neighbor, not stealing, etc. works for every society - even animals. Things like racial superiority, hatred, genocide, guilt and fear are taught by religions. When religion gets organized on a large scale we get Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, gay bashing, and mega churches that fleece the weaker members of society out of their retirement checks. This is morality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeptic Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Okay, I was starting to get pissed off at this article, but now I'm just sitting here laughing my ass off at how unbelievably absurd it is. This is the most hilarious part: "We've largely forgotten that their source is the once-revolutionary Judeo-Christian belief in a loving God, who created human beings in his image and decreed charity to be the first of virtues." Wait a second. You're talking about the Judeo-xian god? The same god who wrote in his best-selling book: "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.' 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death"? Surely you jest. I love how she included this tiny little list of wars fought "in the name of atheism" to make us see how horrible we really are: "The historical record here should give us pause. The French Revolution, Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union -- all sought to replace Judeo-Christian ethics with reason, and ended in massive bloodletting." Okay, first of all, Hitler was a xian. But seriously, what about the HUGE list of wars fought in the name of god? Did we just forget all of those? She is correct, though, that science doesn't really offer much in the way of morality, but that's why different philosophies, such as secular humanism, exist. It's not just atheists vs. xians. What a sad, sorry lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 I agree with you and it upset me too, but I decided I didn't want to register with the site just to comment on her silly article. There is a lot of violence in the Bible and I know at least one Xian who does not deny it too. Quite frankly, the author of this article doesn't know what she is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Since xians are working from a "belief" system, they are free to believe whatever absurd principle they can devise. Since gawd himself can't be proved, stands to reason that nothing he "believes" can be proven, or disproven, either. I say gawd likes tater-tots and aardvarks. Prove me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neon Genesis Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I don't follow the no god/religion = no morals conclusion. Where do they get that?I don't get the whole "without God, everything is permissible" argument, either. On the other hand, you only have to look at history to see how that the opposite is true that with God, everything is permissible. All you have to do is find a bible verse that supports your bigotry and claim it's the word of God and you'll have your own personal cult. But we all know how atheists are destroying society with their evil words and their books that are obviously more horrible than religious fundamentalists flying airplanes into buildings. On the other hand, everyone knows that our true morality comes from his blessed pasta, the Flying Spaghetti Monster! After all, if we don't believe in spaghetti, how can we decide what's good ramen and what's bad ramen? And why are xtians suddenly now referring to xtian values as "Judea-Christian"? It just seemed like they used to only refer to "Christian" values yet now it's "Judea-Christian" values for some reason, and I wonder if it's to avoid being accused of anti-Semetism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpheliaGinger Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 *Just rolls eyes and snickers* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I have to admit. I think that for many people internalizing some benevolent master's voice might actually have a profound impact on their behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddbird1963 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 The writer of the article must have had a busy week. Bereft of any original topic to raise and defend, I believe she reached into her bag of cliches, worn-out arguments , sweeping stereotypes and tired old doctrine and pieced together this little diatribe in about five minutes. This is really a good article for people wanting to know what the latest and best responses the judeo-christian theists have to counter those who would prefer reason and science over a demand to direct one's life according to faith. As we can see, their arsenal is a bit anemic. The sense I get is that the writer of the rant has never bothered to hold a conversation with an atheist or agnostic. She just thinks she knows what motivates us and what constitutes our moral compass. In short, she is a lazy writer. I hope that, should I ever have an article for a news outlet posted for public consumption, I would have a few minor things like facts, good quotes and sound reasoning to offer and not the waste of brain matter that this columnist belched out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueGiant Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 With religion people give into their base desires. I mean, why is it that you can't swing a dead squirrel without hitting a religious leader who is also a pederast (among other things)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mriana Posted June 10, 2009 Author Share Posted June 10, 2009 With religion people give into their base desires. I mean, why is it that you can't swing a dead squirrel without hitting a religious leader who is also a pederast (among other things)? That is funny. Has rigger set in? If so, that could hurt more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godlessgrrl Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I don't follow the no god/religion = no morals conclusion. Where do they get that? It's a mental block, really. Xians can't help but look at the universe through god-colored glasses. To them, god is the author of all things, including law and morality. He is the source of morality, the provider of law, and the arbiter of acceptable social custom. A brain immersed in the belief that this is true simply can't conceive of things being any other way. It's like trying to explain color to the colorblind. It's not necessarily a matter of stupidity, either, it's just an inability to see things any way other than the way they know. People who really would go on a violent, murderous rampage if they didn't believe there was a god telling them not to are probably the best argument for keeping religion around, imnsvho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird28 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 And Christians often do things that are clearly not ethical and think it is good too. For example, my former pastor said that his child has nightmares of people burning in Hell and that's a good thing because that will mean he will live a Godly life to prevent from going there and be motivated to save a lot of people. I think it's clearly wrong to do such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astreja Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Bird28, I agree with you that it's wrong to frighten children in such a manner. That pastor has emotionally crippled his own child, possibly for life. Absolutely inexcusable child abuse. By the way... Welcome to the forums! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts