Your moral indignation was built upon those religions.Indeed.
I would say in spite of the vile mainstream homophobic and misogynous religions that are slowing the progress of our collective moral sense.
If you see the Gods on offer as being as vile as I do, especially the genocidal one, Yahweh/Allah, then please see it as your duty to try to reduce their vile influence.
I spoke a little on this just above.
Regards
DL
Your sense of right and wrong, however misguided, is proof that absolute morals exist.
Name the moral tenets that you think are absolute or objective so that I might know what you are talking about. Listen to this clip first.
Regards
DL
It doesn’t work that way. Standards exist for reasons. When they are violated the reasons make themselves known. It’s probabilistic in nature. Moral laws are not like physical laws.
IOW, you were talking out of your ass and cannot back up your claim.
Your garbage way to post is why I laughed so hard when you wanted to do a one on one.
You would have lasted 2 maybe 3 posts before I would have had to write you off.
What a waste of a mind.
Regards
DL
I do think it can be difficult for people from organized religions to understand concepts of morality / success of the species when many organized religions have been the worst examples of morality and survival of the species.
I think there are two issues to address: survival and morality. There is a huge difference in "surviving" and behaving morally and ethically. There would obviously be things that we would "learn" from a living in a society with a successful survival instinct, such as:
1) Inbreeding would weaken the species;
2) Children must be protected from predators, be taught to feed themselves, work and survive;
3) Killing the king of the village would likely result in weakening the ability of the village to survive.
But these evolutionary imperatives also speak to something more than just survival. They speak to cooperation and advancing the society.
Sounds like moral relativism to me.
Man knows right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes he didn’t violate it. This has been known for at least 6000 years.