Zone1 Without God, right and wrong are just personal beliefs.

[Weatherman2020]

That is true, and when someone rants that God can't exist because there is evil in the world, the only question becomes, why do you classify it as evil? If God, and therefore objective measures of right and wrong, good and evil, do not exist, might makes right, and the strong are justified in taking what they want from the weak.

In order to define evil, one must have a definition of good.
And ‘good’ is normally defined in the Judeo Christian faith.

 

[Arlette]

Without God good and evil are just personal opinions, without any of those opinions being superior to the other. Stalin’s definition is just as valid as yours. And that opinion can change depending upon the circumstances.

It just becomes a slippery slope as broken, sinful society decays further from truth and integrity.

Our jails are full of Christians. Next

 

[LeroyDumonde]

Why is God's alleged position on morality more accurate than Stalin's?

 

[LeroyDumonde]

In order to define evil, one must have a definition of good.
And ‘good’ is normally defined in the Judeo Christian faith.

Judaism banned usury between Jews. Christianity banned usury between anyone. There is no Judeo-Christian faith. Christian and Jewish morality are not the same. Jews reject the Trinity and reject the belief that Jesus is the Messiah. Judaism, unlike Christianity, does not have a universalist morality.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Judaism banned usury between Jews. Christianity banned usury between anyone. There is no Judeo-Christian faith. Christian and Jewish morality are not the same. Jews reject the Trinity and reject the belief that Jesus is the Messiah. Judaism, unlike Christianity, does not have a universalist morality.

Do tell!
What’s the Bible scripture?

Besides, your rant has zero to do with the OP.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Our jails are full of Christians. Next

Well, I doubt that, but thanks to God we have laws that are moral.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Without God good and evil are just personal opinions, without any of those opinions being superior to the other.

Maybe to someone who lives without evidence and reason.

 

[hadit]

Why is God's alleged position on morality more accurate than Stalin's?

The word you are looking for is authoritative. And yes, it is.

 

[hadit]

Maybe to someone who lives without evidence and reason.

How do evidence and reason inform morality?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So what’s the big deal? Why be worried about atoms?

I am not but you seem to be

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You tell me. Where does it say murder and rape are wrong in the Buddhist faith?

That is the point. It may not specifically say it is wrong, although I don't know and I doubt that you do either, yet Budists are not murderers and rapists -certainly no more than anyone else

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

We all no what the Godless governments of China, Russia and Cambodia accomplished.

"We all no......" Did you drop out of school in the third grade? Or was it the 4th?

Those governments are what they are because of an authoritarian ideology , Not for the lack of god

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Of course it is. The Japanese at Nanking did no evil in their own eyes. Their opinion is just as valid as yours.

And the Nazi held the opinion that exterminating the Jews was right and infact necessary, Do you believe that "opinion" is valid and equal to the opinion of those who find their behavior aborant?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Maybe to someone who lives without evidence and reason.

Your opinions are no more right in your eyes than Charles Manson’s in his.

 

[BreezeWood]

Maybe to someone who lives without evidence and reason.

Your opinions are no more right in your eyes than Charles Manson’s in his.

no different than those that base their religion and life on 2 individuals from 4000 years ago, abraham and moses who claimed to talk to the heavens without a shred of evidence and who's lies, the false 10 commandments of moses have been used to persecute and victimize the innocent - 2020. and abraham's hereditary idolatry.

- that was repudiated in the 1st century by jesus who they murdered.

 

[Weatherman2020]

no different than those that base their religion and life on 2 individuals from 4000 years ago, abraham and moses who claimed to talk to the heavens without a shred of evidence and who's lies, the false 10 commandments of moses have been used to persecute and victimize the innocent - 2020. and abraham's hereditary idolatry.

- that was repudiated in the 1st century by jesus who they murdered.

Good to hear from the nether world!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

How do evidence and reason inform morality?

In a much better way than reading primitive mythology.

Some factors of human Well being are objective. And we use reason to arrive at better morality than if we did not use reason.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your opinions are no more right in your eyes than Charles Manson’s in his.

Irrelevant.

 

[Libby von H]

Yes, we have. But my comment was in response to the post that Stalin's opinions were as valid as mine are, as far as Right & Wrong.

But that is just it, they most certainly are not. :

"In 2011, after assessing twenty years of historical research in Eastern European archives, American historian Timothy D. Snyder stated that Stalin deliberately killed about 6 million, which rise to 9 million if foreseeable deaths arising from policies are taken into account."

But what he say to you if you deliberately killed a family member of his.

 

[hadit]

In a much better way than reading primitive mythology.

Some factors of human Well being are objective. And we use reason to arrive at better morality than if we did not use reason.

Evidence and reason are amoral, and relying on them doesn't always lead to a superior moral outcome. A lion is justified in committing infanticide and cannibalism because evidence and reason lead to the conclusion that he is more likely to spread his DNA by eliminating his rival's children and forcing his new pride of females into estrus.
There are many examples that can be given wherein reason and morality are at odds.

Now, what factors of human wellbeing are objective? Are they better for the individual or mankind, and is it an objective positive that mankind even exists? It can be strongly argued that it is not a positive for the planet's ecosystems.