America Without God: No 'Moral Facts'

[Dot Com]

 

[sealybobo]

— Drug dealers belong in prison.

Then put away big pharma in Sing Sing...

My buddy gets vicadin every month but sells them. He thinks his doctor must know. And what doctor thinks its OK he takes that many vikes every month for years? Next he's going to get oxycotton and sell them and make $1000 a month. No one should get a month worth of oxy every month forever. Doctors are drug dealers.

 

[sealybobo]

Perscription drugs are like welfare. We know they are both being abused but can't take them away from people who need them.

 

[Moonglow]

— Drug dealers belong in prison.

Then put away big pharma in Sing Sing...

My buddy gets vicadin every month but sells them. He thinks his doctor must know. And what doctor thinks its OK he takes that many vikes every month for years? Next he's going to get oxycotton and sell them and make $1000 a month. No one should get a month worth of oxy every month forever. Doctors are drug dealers.

And receive kick backs for pushing a specific brand or type....

 

[sealybobo]

1. I was listening to Dennis Prager on the radio, and he referred to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called "Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0




2. Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that"the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

3. ".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?.... many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."




4. While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."



5.He may not know the provenance.....but I know where the view originates. The proximate roots of this view can be traced to the anthropologist Franz Boas, who, in an effort to study exotic cultures without prejudice, found it useful to take the position that no culture is superior to any other. Thus was born the idea of cultural relativity.

The idea spread like wildfire through the universities, catapulted by the radical impetus of the sixties. ready and willing to reject "the universality of Western norms and principles."
Bawer, "The Victim's Revolution"

a. The more fundamental inception was the French Revolution, which threw out God and religion.
Without the concept of God who sets the rules of morality.....every moral fact is no more than an opinion.




b. "Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887:

"...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] ....
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...elativism.html




6. Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'




7. In the West, the dichotomy between empirical truth and morality, or values, began with the scientific revolution, the Enlightenment, impressive as it was, so much so that many thinkers elevated empirical science to the sole source of truth.

a. Empiricism is the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from the senses: what we see, hear, hold, weigh, and measure. Where, then do we find moral truths? Clearly, under such a definition, values and morals could not be truths, but simply emotions, feelings.

b. Empiricist philosopher Hume reasoned this way: if knowledge is based on sensations, then morality, too, must come from sensations, i.e. pain or pleasure, or, as he put it, a matter of ‘taste and sentiment,” Hume claims then, that moral distinctions are not derived from reason but rather from sentiment.
Hume's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)



This view reduces morality to personal taste: “Whatever works for you.”

Lol, an imagined supernatural being who cannot even be proven to exist, as a fact, is required for people to decide that there are moral 'facts'?

Amazing

It always strikes me as very bizarre that we don't treat those who believe in invisible, magical beings flying around as delusional and mentally ill.

Both the Declaration of Independence and our judicial system are based on those beliefs.

Still "delusional and mentally ill"?

Neither are based on moral absolutes handed down from the gods.

So true. Here are the 10 things you can't do. Why not 200 or 10,000 commandments?

 

[Dot Com]

Just for sake of argument, which sky pixie does OP side with?

 

[sealybobo]

God is not proven therefore the authority of YOUR morals stands on shaky ground.

My morals come from human experience and reasoning.

Amd so do the bible's if the bible was simply written by men as a means of mind control, which im fairly certain it was.

^ that

PLUS, why do cons always put the onus of outcomes on institutions instead of getting off of their asses & parenting? EXTREMELY hypocritical if you ask me.

Hmmm? PoliticalSpice?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

. By coincidence, the ranks of the science-atheists is largely populated byMarxists and other Leftists.

As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.
The Schwarz Report | Essays


David Mamet pretty much nails such folks with this quip:

'The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposedintransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy,all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder.'
David Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge."

All we atheists are saying is we dont believe the god you claim visited your ancestors exists. Nothing more. What is Marxist about that?

 

[Moonglow]

God is not proven therefore the authority of YOUR morals stands on shaky ground.

My morals come from human experience and reasoning.

Amd so do the bible's if the bible was simply written by men as a means of mind control, which im fairly certain it was.

^ that

PLUS, why do cons always put the onus of outcomes on institutions instead of getting off of their asses & parenting? EXTREMELY hypocritical if you ask me.

Hmmm? PoliticalSpice?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

. By coincidence, the ranks of the science-atheists is largely populated byMarxists and other Leftists.

As Lenin stated: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism." If God exists and is in supreme command of the universe, He possesses discretionary power, and His actions cannot always be calculated accurately in advance. The whole edifice of Marxism collapses.
The Schwarz Report | Essays


David Mamet pretty much nails such folks with this quip:

'The Left says of the Right, “You fools, it is demonstrable that dinosaurs lived one hundred million years ago, I can prove it to you, how can you say the earth was created in 4000BCE?” But this supposedintransigence on the part of the Religious Right is far less detrimental to the health of the body politic than the Left’s love affair with Marxism, Socialism, Racialism, the Command Economy,all of which have been proven via one hundred years of evidence shows only shortages, despotism and murder.'
David Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge."

All we atheists are saying is we dont believe the god you claim visited your ancestors exists. Nothing more. What is Marxist about that?

She has boundary issues of religion and Marxism....

 

[sealybobo]

Just for sake of argument, which sky pixie does OP side with?

If she's a christian does she believe god visited Joseph smith and Mohammad?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I ask this every sunday

I am Christian...I go to Church every Sunday and have a strong set of ethical standards because of my relationship with Jesus. It bothers me when pseud-Christians spew nonsense on the interweb and don't even go to church!

If they went to church would it be OK then?

Why aren't you at church now?

I tend to go with the belief...don't feed your faith to the trolls.

As for church...I go to the 11:30 service. I will be leaving in about an hour.

I have a friend or at least he was when we were growing up. He's such a know it all right wing conservative and he really does believe in god. His life is such a mess. He was always a slacker. Didn't finish school and lazy. Anyways, long story short he just got his second divorce and he's asking people to borrow $30k.

What I'm wondering is how come gods not helping him? My hunch is that all god is good for is helping him cope with his shitty life. Gods not helping him change just cope.

He's not helping himself.

Why do you hold Christians to a higher standard? We all have personal issues and bad habits. You shouldn't judge people...you don't know their inner issues...same with Christians...they shouldn't judge people either.

Actually, its christians wh

1. I was listening to Dennis Prager on the radio, and he referred to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called "Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0




2. Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that"the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

3. ".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?.... many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."




4. While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."



5.He may not know the provenance.....but I know where the view originates. The proximate roots of this view can be traced to the anthropologist Franz Boas, who, in an effort to study exotic cultures without prejudice, found it useful to take the position that no culture is superior to any other. Thus was born the idea of cultural relativity.

The idea spread like wildfire through the universities, catapulted by the radical impetus of the sixties. ready and willing to reject "the universality of Western norms and principles."
Bawer, "The Victim's Revolution"

a. The more fundamental inception was the French Revolution, which threw out God and religion.
Without the concept of God who sets the rules of morality.....every moral fact is no more than an opinion.




b. "Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887:

"...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] ....
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...elativism.html




6. Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'




7. In the West, the dichotomy between empirical truth and morality, or values, began with the scientific revolution, the Enlightenment, impressive as it was, so much so that many thinkers elevated empirical science to the sole source of truth.

a. Empiricism is the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from the senses: what we see, hear, hold, weigh, and measure. Where, then do we find moral truths? Clearly, under such a definition, values and morals could not be truths, but simply emotions, feelings.

b. Empiricist philosopher Hume reasoned this way: if knowledge is based on sensations, then morality, too, must come from sensations, i.e. pain or pleasure, or, as he put it, a matter of ‘taste and sentiment,” Hume claims then, that moral distinctions are not derived from reason but rather from sentiment.
Hume's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)



This view reduces morality to personal taste: “Whatever works for you.”

Lol, an imagined supernatural being who cannot even be proven to exist, as a fact, is required for people to decide that there are moral 'facts'?

Amazing

It always strikes me as very bizarre that we don't treat those who believe in invisible, magical beings flying around as delusional and mentally ill.

I don't begrudge anyone their choice to believe in God, or a god, or gods. Just don't try to tell me you KNOW what He is, and you KNOW what He believes and teaches and desires or requires from his believers.

Same here. While I do believe its a delusion, as long as they leave me alone and don't try to circumvent the Constitution by forcing it on schools and public places, I don't care what people choose to believe.

I also recognize that it may be a comfort or helpful to some. But, I can't help but notice that the "christians' who post here don't seem to be getting much peace, serenity, guidance or direction from their god.

Instead, they seem angry and bitter, always trying to prove they're the better christian because they can post more copy/pastes.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If religion comes from God, and religion establishes the moral 'facts', which I assume to mean moral absolutes,

1. why aren't they uniform across all religions?

2. why can Men change the rules of any religion whenever they choose, within the limits of the religion's procedure for changing the rules (procedures composed by Men)????

I was just reading about the many changes religions have made to their particular version of the bible. They all have an agenda and they have changed the bible to help them push that agenda.

Funny to me is that all religions say their god is the 'one true god' and that all others are "idols". The basic selling point of all religions is that their god can beat up your god.

 

[sealybobo]

I am Christian...I go to Church every Sunday and have a strong set of ethical standards because of my relationship with Jesus. It bothers me when pseud-Christians spew nonsense on the interweb and don't even go to church!

If they went to church would it be OK then?

Why aren't you at church now?

I tend to go with the belief...don't feed your faith to the trolls.

As for church...I go to the 11:30 service. I will be leaving in about an hour.

I have a friend or at least he was when we were growing up. He's such a know it all right wing conservative and he really does believe in god. His life is such a mess. He was always a slacker. Didn't finish school and lazy. Anyways, long story short he just got his second divorce and he's asking people to borrow $30k.

What I'm wondering is how come gods not helping him? My hunch is that all god is good for is helping him cope with his shitty life. Gods not helping him change just cope.

He's not helping himself.

Why do you hold Christians to a higher standard? We all have personal issues and bad habits. You shouldn't judge people...you don't know their inner issues...same with Christians...they shouldn't judge people either.

Actually, its christians wh

1. I was listening to Dennis Prager on the radio, and he referred to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called "Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0




2. Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that"the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

3. ".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?.... many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."




4. While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."



5.He may not know the provenance.....but I know where the view originates. The proximate roots of this view can be traced to the anthropologist Franz Boas, who, in an effort to study exotic cultures without prejudice, found it useful to take the position that no culture is superior to any other. Thus was born the idea of cultural relativity.

The idea spread like wildfire through the universities, catapulted by the radical impetus of the sixties. ready and willing to reject "the universality of Western norms and principles."
Bawer, "The Victim's Revolution"

a. The more fundamental inception was the French Revolution, which threw out God and religion.
Without the concept of God who sets the rules of morality.....every moral fact is no more than an opinion.




b. "Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887:

"...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] ....
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...elativism.html




6. Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'




7. In the West, the dichotomy between empirical truth and morality, or values, began with the scientific revolution, the Enlightenment, impressive as it was, so much so that many thinkers elevated empirical science to the sole source of truth.

a. Empiricism is the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from the senses: what we see, hear, hold, weigh, and measure. Where, then do we find moral truths? Clearly, under such a definition, values and morals could not be truths, but simply emotions, feelings.

b. Empiricist philosopher Hume reasoned this way: if knowledge is based on sensations, then morality, too, must come from sensations, i.e. pain or pleasure, or, as he put it, a matter of ‘taste and sentiment,” Hume claims then, that moral distinctions are not derived from reason but rather from sentiment.
Hume's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)



This view reduces morality to personal taste: “Whatever works for you.”

Lol, an imagined supernatural being who cannot even be proven to exist, as a fact, is required for people to decide that there are moral 'facts'?

Amazing

It always strikes me as very bizarre that we don't treat those who believe in invisible, magical beings flying around as delusional and mentally ill.

I don't begrudge anyone their choice to believe in God, or a god, or gods. Just don't try to tell me you KNOW what He is, and you KNOW what He believes and teaches and desires or requires from his believers.

Same here. While I do believe its a delusion, as long as they leave me alone and don't try to circumvent the Constitution by forcing it on schools and public places, I don't care what people choose to believe.

I also recognize that it may be a comfort or helpful to some. But, I can't help but notice that the "christians' who post here don't seem to be getting much peace, serenity, guidance or direction from their god.

Instead, they seem angry and bitter, always trying to prove they're the better christian because they can post more copy/pastes.

I do care if instead of using logic and reason in our decision making process we instead use superstition and mysticism.

A lie is a lie no matter how good it makes you feel.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

How come its always the so-called "christians" who say, that without their "god"/religion/bible that they would have no morals or ethics, no sense of right and wrong?

Are you nutters really only one Sunday school session away from being mass murderers?

Isn't an extreme belief in God the number one criticism of the fundamentalist Islamic extremists/terrorists?

Isn't religion so often the source of their morality?

They say " those people have perverted god" but that's the problem with delusions. I have a good delusion and your delusion is wrong. But my delusion is the right one to have.

Yes ... its that "my god can beat up your god" again.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

9. " How does the dichotomy between fact and opinion relate to morality.... Kids are asked to sort facts from opinions and, without fail,everyvalue claim is labeled as an opinion. Here’s a little test devised from questions available on fact vs. opinion worksheets online: are the following facts or opinions?


— Copying homework assignments is wrong.

— Cursing in school is inappropriate behavior.

— All men are created equal.

— It is worth sacrificing some personal liberties to protect our country from terrorism.

— It is wrong for people under the age of 21 to drink alcohol.

— Vegetarians are healthier than people who eat meat.

— Drug dealers belong in prison.

In each case, the worksheets categorize these claims as opinions. ... each of these claims is a value claim and value claims are not facts.
This is repeated ad nauseum: any claim with good, right, wrong, etc. is not a fact." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0

Cursing is wrong because you'll get in trouble. Or it will make you look bad. Or because it might offend others. Or it might lead to violence if you are cursing someone. Lots of reasons not to curse without god.

I agree.

Lots of reasons can be attributed to her entire list and none of them have anything to do with believing in a god.

 

[sealybobo]

If religion comes from God, and religion establishes the moral 'facts', which I assume to mean moral absolutes,

1. why aren't they uniform across all religions?

2. why can Men change the rules of any religion whenever they choose, within the limits of the religion's procedure for changing the rules (procedures composed by Men)????

I was just reading about the many changes religions have made to their particular version of the bible. They all have an agenda and they have changed the bible to help them push that agenda.

Funny to me is that all religions say their god is the 'one true god' and that all others are "idols". The basic selling point of all religions is that their god can beat up your god.

Well if you want me to join or convert you have to tell me why yours is better. Every popular religion has a unusual hook or twist that makes them better than the rest.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If they went to church would it be OK then?

Why aren't you at church now?

I tend to go with the belief...don't feed your faith to the trolls.

As for church...I go to the 11:30 service. I will be leaving in about an hour.

I have a friend or at least he was when we were growing up. He's such a know it all right wing conservative and he really does believe in god. His life is such a mess. He was always a slacker. Didn't finish school and lazy. Anyways, long story short he just got his second divorce and he's asking people to borrow $30k.

What I'm wondering is how come gods not helping him? My hunch is that all god is good for is helping him cope with his shitty life. Gods not helping him change just cope.

He's not helping himself.

Why do you hold Christians to a higher standard? We all have personal issues and bad habits. You shouldn't judge people...you don't know their inner issues...same with Christians...they shouldn't judge people either.

Actually, its christians wh

1. I was listening to Dennis Prager on the radio, and he referred to this NYTimes piece by a secular philosopher, called "Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts." http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.co...ildren-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/?_r=0




2. Most children who weren't brought up in a religious household, with a clear recognition of God, fail to recognize the difference between moral facts, and opinions.

While the author of the article bemoans, as do most of us, that"the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture" he fails to grasp the reason for this situation..

3. ".... if you found out that our public schools were teaching children that it is not true that it’s wrong to kill people for fun or cheat on tests? Would you be surprised?.... many college-aged students don’t believe in moral facts."




4. While raising an excellent point, our philosopher misses the brass ring, here: "What I didn’t know was where this attitude came from. Given the presence of moral relativism in some academic circles, some people might naturally assume that philosophers themselves are to blame."



5.He may not know the provenance.....but I know where the view originates. The proximate roots of this view can be traced to the anthropologist Franz Boas, who, in an effort to study exotic cultures without prejudice, found it useful to take the position that no culture is superior to any other. Thus was born the idea of cultural relativity.

The idea spread like wildfire through the universities, catapulted by the radical impetus of the sixties. ready and willing to reject "the universality of Western norms and principles."
Bawer, "The Victim's Revolution"

a. The more fundamental inception was the French Revolution, which threw out God and religion.
Without the concept of God who sets the rules of morality.....every moral fact is no more than an opinion.




b. "Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887:

"...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] ....
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...elativism.html




6. Our philosopher seems shocked to find that the Enlightenment ideas, those of David Hume, have been accepted, wholesale, in society.
" When I went to visit my son’s second grade open house, I found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes."

You can see where this leaves 'God' or 'religion.'




7. In the West, the dichotomy between empirical truth and morality, or values, began with the scientific revolution, the Enlightenment, impressive as it was, so much so that many thinkers elevated empirical science to the sole source of truth.

a. Empiricism is the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from the senses: what we see, hear, hold, weigh, and measure. Where, then do we find moral truths? Clearly, under such a definition, values and morals could not be truths, but simply emotions, feelings.

b. Empiricist philosopher Hume reasoned this way: if knowledge is based on sensations, then morality, too, must come from sensations, i.e. pain or pleasure, or, as he put it, a matter of ‘taste and sentiment,” Hume claims then, that moral distinctions are not derived from reason but rather from sentiment.
Hume's Moral Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)



This view reduces morality to personal taste: “Whatever works for you.”

Lol, an imagined supernatural being who cannot even be proven to exist, as a fact, is required for people to decide that there are moral 'facts'?

Amazing

It always strikes me as very bizarre that we don't treat those who believe in invisible, magical beings flying around as delusional and mentally ill.

I don't begrudge anyone their choice to believe in God, or a god, or gods. Just don't try to tell me you KNOW what He is, and you KNOW what He believes and teaches and desires or requires from his believers.

Same here. While I do believe its a delusion, as long as they leave me alone and don't try to circumvent the Constitution by forcing it on schools and public places, I don't care what people choose to believe.

I also recognize that it may be a comfort or helpful to some. But, I can't help but notice that the "christians' who post here don't seem to be getting much peace, serenity, guidance or direction from their god.

Instead, they seem angry and bitter, always trying to prove they're the better christian because they can post more copy/pastes.

I do care if instead of using logic and reason in our decision making process we instead use superstition and mysticism.

A lie is a lie no matter how good it makes you feel.

Yes, I see your point and agree.

I always think we will have arrived at an important point in our history when we elect an openly atheist president.

Its just plain scary that the most powerful person on the planet starts every thought and action with the delusional belief in an invisible fairy.

 

[Moonglow]

Shouldn't the religiously pious trolls like Polichic be in mass now??

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If religion comes from God, and religion establishes the moral 'facts', which I assume to mean moral absolutes,

1. why aren't they uniform across all religions?

2. why can Men change the rules of any religion whenever they choose, within the limits of the religion's procedure for changing the rules (procedures composed by Men)????

I was just reading about the many changes religions have made to their particular version of the bible. They all have an agenda and they have changed the bible to help them push that agenda.

Funny to me is that all religions say their god is the 'one true god' and that all others are "idols". The basic selling point of all religions is that their god can beat up your god.

Well if you want me to join or convert you have to tell me why yours is better. Every popular religion has a unusual hook or twist that makes them better than the rest.

Not to me.

I've never found any religion more attractive to me than science and fact-based reality.

 

[NYcarbineer]

9

— It is wrong for people under the age of 21 to drink alcohol.

That's an opinion.

 

[Dot Com]

Just for sake of argument, which sky pixie does OP side with?

If she's a christian does she believe god visited Joseph smith and Mohammad?

well PoliticalSpice PoliticalChic