Can Atheists be Moral?

[james bond]

the dark side do not want to know the truth ...

Of course, we do. We're not atheists.

 

[james bond]

Next, you'lll be telling us she's Catholic and had two very, very, very large life insurance policies to cover such occurrence. What happened to her?

Great job being an insensitive asshole and go fuck yourself.

The harrowing true story of Chernobyl's Vasily Ignatenko and his pregnant wife Lyudmilla.

Finally, you are able to tell us in your own words a story we are interested in, but it's full of hurrible innuendos about Christians and their Biblical morality. Where was your morality in all this?

I won't get a straight answer, so look at how I have to wrench an answer outta you haha. Obviously, the woman didn't know what she was doing and up against. We have pregnant women who do the same themselves to poison their infants with drugs, alcohol, and worse. We also have atheist commies, their scientists, and doctors in the story who kept it from the firefighters and their families.

Is BW gonna call this an abortion or birth control?

What are you gonna be complaining about after this? Beotching is the only way atheists and libs feel like they are thinking and doing something to better their wackturd world.

 

[ding]

Next, you'lll be telling us she's Catholic and had two very, very, very large life insurance policies to cover such occurrence. What happened to her?

Great job being an insensitive asshole and go fuck yourself.

The harrowing true story of Chernobyl's Vasily Ignatenko and his pregnant wife Lyudmilla.

I bet you’re one of those people who believe they are moral.

 

[Grumblenuts]

to tell us

Asshole: One lacking the balls to speak for themself.

 

[james bond]

to tell us

Asshole: One lacking the balls to speak for themself.

My my. I must've hit a nerve. I hadn't finish getting answers to my questions. Wasn't even at the point of making a comment on the documentary, but did have comments on your presentation haha.

In California, we cannot speak for those who want nuclear power as it has been made illegal by the Democrats. I suppose it can be very dangerous from your documentary, but it would be a calculated risk. Had I gotten the Homer Simpson job, it would've been at the one at San Luis Obispo where the plant has been shut down. Still need people to work the shutdown for years. Beautiful area.

 

[james bond]

Next, you'lll be telling us she's Catholic and had two very, very, very large life insurance policies to cover such occurrence. What happened to her?

Great job being an insensitive asshole and go fuck yourself.

The harrowing true story of Chernobyl's Vasily Ignatenko and his pregnant wife Lyudmilla.

I bet you’re one of those people who believe they are moral.

I think we are getting to the cause of why Grumblenuts brought up the new HBO Chernobyl tv miniseries and claimed it was "highly documentary," but posted some other link. The show is fiction haha. Mighty noble of him. May his penis turn to mush.

The Reason They Fictionalize Nuclear Disasters Like Chernobyl Is Because They Kill So Few People
The Reason They Fictionalize Nuclear Disasters Like Chernobyl Is Because They Kill So Few People

 

[Grumblenuts]

Exposing the misinformation of Michael Shellenberger and 'Environmental Progress'
What a dick.

 

[sealybobo]

Many theists believe it is clear-cut. Humans can only have opinions about morality, and no one’s opinion is any more valid than anyone else’s. This leads them to the conclusion that an objective source of morality must stand apart from, and above, humans. That source, they say, is God. Since atheists, reject God, atheists can have no basis for morality.

This is really two separate arguments: (1) that God is the source of objective morality and humans can learn morality from God and (2) that humans on their own have no way to know what is moral and what is not.

Can atheists be moral? - Atheist Alliance International

I have a question. How can we call ourselves a Christian nation when 77% of our citizens are pro choice?

Is abortion cool with Christians?

Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions

 

[danielpalos]

is a warfare-state economy moral if conducted on a for-profit basis?

 

[BreezeWood]

is a warfare-state economy moral if conducted on a for-profit basis?

when adequately spun by pathological liars ... pugs.


Trump Administration Plans to Sell More Than $2 Billion of Arms to Taiwan

and how evenly are the profits shared after the 1% grab their 92% markup before they show a profit ... and day traders, myself, being in and out without ever lifting a finger higher than a key on a keyboard.

 

[james bond]

What a dick.

I got more info. Woulda, coulda, shoulda, but didn't. We should have had safe, clean nuclear power since the 1970's. Instead, we got almost five decades of coal powering our power grid, and with it, gigatons of carbon dioxide, coal dust, and other toxic chemicals pumped into our atmosphere. I included CO2 just to tweak your nose Grumblenuts.

"Chernobyl" is yet another attempt by a liberal network, in this case HBO, to scare the hell out of people.

 

[BreezeWood]

We should have had safe, clean nuclear power since the 1970's.

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

not to mention nuclear waste disposal ... just believing is all it takes for some. lowlife's. liberal haters.


- solar power, electric automobiles - grudgingly, even the lowlife's begin to catch on "over time".

 

[james bond]

We should have had safe, clean nuclear power since the 1970's.

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

not to mention nuclear waste disposal ... just believing is all it takes for some. lowlife's. liberal haters.


- solar power, electric automobiles - grudgingly, even the lowlife's begin to catch on "over time".

DID YOU EVEN READ YOUR OWN LINK YOU DUNDERHEAD???!!!???!!!

"accident had been foreseeable, and that the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), had failed to meet basic safety requirements such as risk assessment, preparing for containing collateral damage, and developing evacuation plans. On 12 October 2012, TEPCO admitted for the first time that it had failed to take necessary measures for fear of inviting lawsuits or protests against its nuclear plants."

 

[BreezeWood]

We should have had safe, clean nuclear power since the 1970's.

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

not to mention nuclear waste disposal ... just believing is all it takes for some. lowlife's. liberal haters.


- solar power, electric automobiles - grudgingly, even the lowlife's begin to catch on "over time".

DID YOU EVEN READ YOUR OWN LINK YOU DUNDERHEAD???!!!???!!!

"accident had been foreseeable, and that the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), had failed to meet basic safety requirements such as risk assessment, preparing for containing collateral damage, and developing evacuation plans. On 12 October 2012, TEPCO admitted for the first time that it had failed to take necessary measures for fear of inviting lawsuits or protests against its nuclear plants."

.

DID YOU EVEN READ YOUR OWN LINK YOU DUNDERHEAD???!!!???!!!

yes, they built the atomic reactor along the sea coast - with your blessing ... to being with.

"Chernobyl" is yet another attempt by a liberal network, in this case HBO, to scare the hell out of people.

- it is theirs,TEPCO etc and your incompetence why nuclear power is the ultimate threat to humanity.

-TEPCO admitted for the first time that it had failed to take necessary measures for fear of inviting lawsuits or protests against its nuclear plants."

the same fear you have bond for writing correctly the events of the 1st century or giving credits to your 4th century document that are of your own making.

attacking liberalism, your distaste for holywood values is your own perverse worldview you attempt to justify as from the 1st century which is diametrically its opposite meaning as you dishonestly portray through your 4th century document.

 

[james bond]

it is theirs,TEPCO etc and your incompetence why nuclear power is the ultimate threat to humanity.

TEPCO should have made safety its prime concern. They were worried about lawsuits to stop them from the greens and they weren't ready to handle a tsunami disaster.

Thus, you were wrong and it wasn't another Chernobyl. Chernobyl was an accident and much was learned from it. It made nuclear power safer for those in the future. That one, the nuclear power group should take responsibility in order to make reactors more safe.

The Chernobyl mini-series was another attempt by a liberal network, in this case HBO, to scare the hell out of people.

 

[BreezeWood]

it is theirs,TEPCO etc and your incompetence why nuclear power is the ultimate threat to humanity.

TEPCO should have made safety its prime concern. They were worried about lawsuits to stop them from the greens and they weren't ready to handle a tsunami disaster.

Thus, you were wrong and it wasn't another Chernobyl. Chernobyl was an accident and much was learned from it. It made nuclear power safer for those in the future. That one, the nuclear power group should take responsibility in order to make reactors more safe.

The Chernobyl mini-series was another attempt by a liberal network, in this case HBO, to scare the hell out of people.

.

The Chernobyl mini-series was another attempt by a liberal network, in this case HBO, to scare the hell out of people.

again as always you ignore the nuance's of posts rather than giving a substantive response ... here, another chance for giggles -

- attacking liberalism, your distaste for holywood values is your own perverse worldview you attempt to justify as from the 1st century which is diametrically its opposite meaning as you dishonestly portray through your 4th century document.

and your objection is without merit in regards to nuclear power, just ask yucca mountain. whatever lessons learned or not learned, your excuse for japan and the people that allow a nuclear reactor to be built on an ocean shore.

 

[james bond]

and your objection is without merit in regards to nuclear power, just ask yucca mountain. whatever lessons learned or not learned, your excuse for japan and the people that allow a nuclear reactor to be built on an ocean shore.

Just what are you going by? Are you going by what I post or did you see the fictional mini-series?

I saw the documentary of the aftermath on Fukushima. I didn't use that to argue against what happened at Chernobyl.

I'm going by Grumblenuts posts and reading about the miniseries on another forum. It wasn't a documentary, but a tv miniseries based on a true story. His posts were a bit misleading. I'll have to watch it when I get a chance.

 

[danielpalos]

We should have had safe, clean nuclear power since the 1970's.

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster - Wikipedia

not to mention nuclear waste disposal ... just believing is all it takes for some. lowlife's. liberal haters.


- solar power, electric automobiles - grudgingly, even the lowlife's begin to catch on "over time".

DID YOU EVEN READ YOUR OWN LINK YOU DUNDERHEAD???!!!???!!!

"accident had been foreseeable, and that the plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), had failed to meet basic safety requirements such as risk assessment, preparing for containing collateral damage, and developing evacuation plans. On 12 October 2012, TEPCO admitted for the first time that it had failed to take necessary measures for fear of inviting lawsuits or protests against its nuclear plants."

not enough tax breaks to ensure the latest safety equipment can used in situations like these?

i would rather cut the cost of taxes for that, than a firm trying to lower their costs to the maximum extent possible including the costs of regulatory safety.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Thus, you were wrong and it wasn't another Chernobyl. Chernobyl was an accident and much was learned from it. It made nuclear power safer for those in the future. That one, the nuclear power group should take responsibility in order to make reactors more safe.

They were much the same. Watch the damn series, sparky. The parallels far outweigh the distinctions. Both were "accidents" waiting to happen due to poor design and risk assessment. Both tried to BS their way out of admitting to the public that there was any problem for as long as they could. That's predictable and made the damage much worse. More unnecessary death. suffering, long term radioactive mess to deal with, less readily available evidence to learn anything from. All deliberate to avoid responsibility. Nothing has changed. Same stupid record the industry's been spinning from day one.

 

[noonereal]

Can Atheists be Moral?

I think the question that needs to be answered is, can the religious be moral?