CDZ A Question For Atheists

[sealybobo]

This guy makes a lot of sense.
Reza Aslan:

“Part of the problem is that there is this misconception that people derive their values from their scriptures. The truth is it is more often the case that people insert their values into their scriptures.... In this country, not 200 years ago, both slave owners and abolitionists not only used the same Bible to justify their viewpoints, they used the same verses to do so. That’s the thing about scripture, its power comes from its malleability. You can read it in any way you want to.”

“If you are a violent misogynist, you will find plenty in the Koran or in the Bible to justify your viewpoint. If you’re a peaceful feminist, you will find just as much in those scriptures to justify your viewpoint.”

“... you are bringing yourself, your views, your politics, your social ideas into the text. How you read scripture has everything to do with who you are. God did not make you a bigot, you’re just a bigot.”​

The bible says everything and says nothing.

 

[quorthon]

If the scripture is used to **** me around then I destroy it. That's my atheistic answer.

 

[oldfart]

I have wondered from time to time just what you base the rules of life on?
Morality started based on scripture. But an atheist does not follow scripture.
If you destroy scripture then you destroy morality.

You of course may argue life is based on laws. Fair enough but what were those laws based on? Now if someone kicked in your door and stole your stuff and raped your wife and killed your kids you would say that is wrong based on the law BUT as already stated those laws were based on scripture.

How does an atheist base any rules on anything WITHOUT that base in scripture?

Since about two-thirds of the world's population live in societies which do not and never have based their ethical and legal systems on "scripture", your premise is obviously wrong. The real question is when will you emerge from your self-imposed ignorance and stop this whiny special pleading?

I hope society never falls back on this.

Exactly why are you afraid of a legal system based on Confucian, Taoist, Buddhist, and Hindu principles?

 

[oldfart]

I have wondered from time to time just what you base the rules of life on?
Morality started based on scripture. But an atheist does not follow scripture.
If you destroy scripture then you destroy morality.

You of course may argue life is based on laws. Fair enough but what were those laws based on? Now if someone kicked in your door and stole your stuff and raped your wife and killed your kids you would say that is wrong based on the law BUT as already stated those laws were based on scripture.

How does an atheist base any rules on anything WITHOUT that base in scripture?

Since about two-thirds of the world's population live in societies which do not and never have based their ethical and legal systems on "scripture", your premise is obviously wrong. The real question is when will you emerge from your self-imposed ignorance and stop this whiny special pleading?

I would think you are being too literal .... clearly, throughout the thread, those that referenced 'scripture' were talking about a codified set of rules/laws ... whereas those who object to it, are speaking specifically of the Christian 'scriptures'.

I suggest that Muslims have 'scriptures', Jews have 'scriptures', Buddhists have 'scriptures' ... a set of rules by which they all try to live. Only atheists have the arrogance to believe that they are inherently smarter the rest of the world, and therefore, can make up the rules as they go along.

Therefore, I think your "two thirds of the world" claim is inherently false ...

Two third of the world's population live in the Indian subcontinent, China, Japan, and East Asia. With the exception of the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia, none of these societies has every had a a predominantly Abrahamic faith. This does not mean they are atheists or have no faith.

You are embarrassing yourself in a display of ignorance. Most Buddhists reject the idea of a monotheistic personified god, as do Hindu, Confucian, and Taoist communities. The true arrogance is the belief that a code of laws was dispensed by a deity that handed down "scripture" and that no other faith tradition can be valid. The OP clearly did not contemplate that good people of other faiths exist, or probably that the OP was not aware of them. Asking if people of another faith can be "good" people and have an ethical code is frankly insulting. That is why I made a snarky remark in my original response.

 

[Spare_change]

I have wondered from time to time just what you base the rules of life on?
Morality started based on scripture. But an atheist does not follow scripture.
If you destroy scripture then you destroy morality.

You of course may argue life is based on laws. Fair enough but what were those laws based on? Now if someone kicked in your door and stole your stuff and raped your wife and killed your kids you would say that is wrong based on the law BUT as already stated those laws were based on scripture.

How does an atheist base any rules on anything WITHOUT that base in scripture?

Since about two-thirds of the world's population live in societies which do not and never have based their ethical and legal systems on "scripture", your premise is obviously wrong. The real question is when will you emerge from your self-imposed ignorance and stop this whiny special pleading?

I would think you are being too literal .... clearly, throughout the thread, those that referenced 'scripture' were talking about a codified set of rules/laws ... whereas those who object to it, are speaking specifically of the Christian 'scriptures'.

I suggest that Muslims have 'scriptures', Jews have 'scriptures', Buddhists have 'scriptures' ... a set of rules by which they all try to live. Only atheists have the arrogance to believe that they are inherently smarter the rest of the world, and therefore, can make up the rules as they go along.

Therefore, I think your "two thirds of the world" claim is inherently false ...

Two third of the world's population live in the Indian subcontinent, China, Japan, and East Asia. With the exception of the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia, none of these societies has every had a a predominantly Abrahamic faith. This does not mean they are atheists or have no faith.

You are embarrassing yourself in a display of ignorance. Most Buddhists reject the idea of a monotheistic personified god, as do Hindu, Confucian, and Taoist communities. The true arrogance is the belief that a code of laws was dispensed by a deity that handed down "scripture" and that no other faith tradition can be valid. The OP clearly did not contemplate that good people of other faiths exist, or probably that the OP was not aware of them. Asking if people of another faith can be "good" people and have an ethical code is frankly insulting. That is why I made a snarky remark in my original response.

Quit trying to twist facts to meet your own purposes .... I never proposed any such differentiation between religions.

Had you bothered to read the whole thread, you would have seen that the concept of 'scriptures' was brought up by atheists who didn't know better. Their fixation on Christian scriptures was damaging the discussion. So, another poster defined, for the purpose of this thread, that 'scriptures' should refer to any codified rules/laws of any religion.

I didn't ask if ".. if people of another faith can be "good" people and have an ethical code ...". In fact, my position has been exactly the opposite. Of course, people of another faith can be 'good'. They answer to a higher authority - whatever name you choose to call it.

My question has been, consistently, whether ANY atheist can be 'good', given that they only answer to themselves, and their vested self-interest disqualifies them as an arbiter of their own actions. I have been consistently rewarded by attacks on my moral code, my religion, and my belief in a higher being. Not once has an atheist seriously attempted to resolve the dichotomy necessary to justify atheism.

As for your tired little rant .... next time, read that damn posts before you make a fool out of yourself again.

 

[sealybobo]

I have wondered from time to time just what you base the rules of life on?
Morality started based on scripture. But an atheist does not follow scripture.
If you destroy scripture then you destroy morality.

You of course may argue life is based on laws. Fair enough but what were those laws based on? Now if someone kicked in your door and stole your stuff and raped your wife and killed your kids you would say that is wrong based on the law BUT as already stated those laws were based on scripture.

How does an atheist base any rules on anything WITHOUT that base in scripture?

Since about two-thirds of the world's population live in societies which do not and never have based their ethical and legal systems on "scripture", your premise is obviously wrong. The real question is when will you emerge from your self-imposed ignorance and stop this whiny special pleading?

I hope society never falls back on this.

Exactly why are you afraid of a legal system based on Confucian, Taoist, Buddhist, and Hindu principles?

I would have to know more about them to give you an intelligent answer. What countries use buddy or Hindu for their laws currently? Do those teligions believe in gods? I must admit they are more appealing to me than the top 3 abrahamic religions.