Athiests, where do you get your moral values?

[wuggle]

Hmmm, But if he (she ?) gives me an intellect and the ability to choose for myself and I choose to deny his (her) existance are my actions (good or bad) ultimately my doing or his (hers)?

 

If God exists, and is omnipitent and omnipresent, whether I believe in him (or her) or not, then this existance precludes the possibility of my own free will and that of all sentient beings in the universe, him being all powerful and all, ultimately everything is his fault, ergo there is no free will.

 

So if the logic that he(she) imbibed in me leads me to the logical conclusion that he(she) doesn't exist even if he(she) does then I am free to perform whatever gross depraved acts I choose and it is ultimtely not my fault but his(hers) for giving me said free will with which to deny him(her) and his(her) moral code.

 

 

:laugh:

[wuggle]

Keep in mind that if you don't follow the tenets given, you'll be disinherited.

 

Funnily enough my real father sort of disinherited me as well :D

[Lizzie60]

I have to say that moral values have absolutely nothing to do with religion.

[Trialbyfire]

Funnily enough my real father sort of disinherited me as well :D

I hope he didn't sentence you to eternity in magma pools!

 

Btw, I'm agnostic but was raised Christian.

[wuggle]

I hope he didn't sentence you to eternity in magma pools!

 

Is that one of those new fancy ones with the blue lights :D

[Trialbyfire]

Is that one of those new fancy ones with the blue lights :D

Yup, with a 60" LCD with unlimited satellite access. How much more could you want from a hot tub!

[wuggle]

agree but replace the tv with a decent sound system, good bottle of Ripassa and my wife and sounds perfect.

 

(Apologies for the threadjack but it is quiet on here tonight.)

[dunstable]

You don't need to believe in God, for God to exist. He's everywhere and loves you, just like he loves everyone else.

Since that statement is not verifiable, it is meaningless.

[Star Gazer]

I don't agree with some of the practices in the business, however, everything is legal, I just believe that some of the methods to make sales are misleading and predatory.

 

Then it's probably illegal. Compare California's Business & Professions Code section 17200, et seq., to that of your own state.

 

Misleading and predatory business practices ARE actionable.

[dunstable]

I have to say that moral values have absolutely nothing to do with religion.

"Absolutely nothing" is too strong! Religion is one of the many influences on moral values. The strength of religion's influence varies from person to person. For atheists, like myself, it would certainly be minor.

[Enema]

"Absolutely nothing" is too strong! Religion is one of the many influences on moral values. The strength of religion's influence varies from person to person. For atheists, like myself, it would certainly be minor.

 

Mayhaps she meant the origin of moral values.

[MrsHellnoFire]

I was pretty much raised with christian values and therefore my current moral decisions are based on Christian values.

 

I think to myself, if I didn't feel accountable to God, how would I make my moral judgements?

 

I feel like if I didn't have these moral values based on Christian principles, there would be no "wrong" I could do.

 

I would be completely free to do anything without guilt. (doesn't sound too bad actually)

 

anyway, Atheists, where do you get your moral values/judgements and how do you decipher whats "wrong"?

 

 

So basically you are saying the only reason you have morals is because (you believe) YOU will one day be held accountable? Wow.. purely selfish motives.

You really believe that your religion is the only reason you would feel any guilt? Guilt of what may I add? The guilt of not being redeemed by God?

Throughout history, more immorality can be attributed to the institute of religion than that of any group of atheists or agnostics.

 

I really find it insulting that someone would actually assume all other humans may be inherently evil just because they lack the brainwashing of an organized religion in their lives. The ability to have a conscience does not require religion! What do you think makes us human?

 

The most infuriating aspect of organized religion is the bigotry and hypocrisy of it all! Practice what they preach and maybe one day they will be seen in a better light!

[MrsHellnoFire]

Actually, we've elevated ourselves. I doubt your average chimpanzee looks at humans and says, "Hey boss, yu're speshul".

To reinforce this point, we're also the only animal that rationalizes killing our environment, which contains our food, water and air that we breathe. It's like the person who's solely book smart, who runs around spouting ideals but when it comes down to living, can barely get by, since they lack any form of common sense.

 

Didn't you hear? MAN OWNS the planet and all the animals on it; is free to do as he pleases with his environment- Bible says so. As long as it's for business purposes and "your neighborhood, not mine", the far-right by and large does not give a damn about what happens past their life span. The almighty dollar trumps morality. But they are outwardly religious, so that means no matter what, they are always in the right cause "God is behind <them>". Bush speaks to God on a constant basis and God tells him what to do; so that means everything he does is God's will. If it weren't for religion, many more people would need to be institutionalized for their warped delusions. Got crazy? This WORLD has got it in spades!

[FleshNBones]

This thread appears to be an invitation for the self-righteous.

 

Few things are as humorous as bigotry.

[Moai]

This thread appears to be an invitation for the self-righteous.

 

Few things are as humorous as bigotry.

 

Bigotry? Really?

 

Let's say that this thread was all about how nutty astrology is, or how National Socialism is evil and oppressive, or how stupid the idea of a flat Earth is, or the nuttiness that is Scientology. Would that be bigoted?

 

 

No, it would just be modern people getting some entertainment out of ideas that are demonstrably ludicrous.

 

Just because a majority of people today are superstitious, it does not follow that it is bigoted to make light of both the superstition and the superstitious.

 

Bigotry is a more apt description concerning someone who makes broad judgments about race or gender than ideas. All ideas are not equal. To suggest so is beyond laughable.

 

If your comment is valid, I and other must respect those who believe in a flat Earth, and give them as much respect and deference as an astronomer. We must consider a faith-healer as being on equal ground as a medical doctor. Obviously, such is total nonsense.

 

Too many people have the idea that a Bible-school graduate in theology has as much to say on biology as any Phd. in the field. It is nonsensical and backward to suggest such.

 

Let's consider the Pope. What does he know, exactly? Does his life-long study of the Bible give him any insights into life than a biologist? I think not. Unless you buy into the same game of pretend the Pope plays, all of his knowledge is totally meaningless. In fact, it is actually hurtful, as it leads him to say things like condoms actually increase the spread of AIDS.

 

Another one is whether or not, within the bounds of marriage even, one partner infected with HIV is permitted to wear a condom in order to not infect the other, who is HIV negative. This is the subject of much debate. Really. All of that study and reflection and something so simple must be argued? And somehow thinking people are supposed to respect that?

 

How much did the theological study effect the priests who deny the Holocaust? How does their deep theological knowledge lead them to a conclusion that is so laughable and offensive? Are we to respect their conclusions as much as a historian--let alone an actual victim of the horror?

 

Read about it here: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1060134.html

 

I have no more respect for a theologian than I do someone who has memorized the permutations of the Star Wars Universe. Both are make-believe, and neither has any effect on reality.

[sxyNYCcpl]

I am not an atheist, insofar as I believe in a higher power, God if you will. I don't know that he calls himself "God", nor do I think he really cares what, if anything, we call him.

 

That said, my suspicion is that the original question relates more to sexual morality than other forms. After all, most forms of immorality, such as stealing or killing are immoral whether one believes in an afterlife or not, whereas sexual "immorality" exists only because so many acts are prohibited by religion. In fact, an argument could be made that killing is that even MORE immoral if there is not an afterlife, as it really is depriving a sentient being of what little precious sentience we are entitled to. As for sexual immorality, it absolutely exists, but not the way the typical bible thumper defines it. Sexual immorality exists when someone gets hurt. When that does not happen, it is not immoral, even if most (or even all) major religions label the actions in question as such.

 

I was raised Christian, and ironically still self-identify as such, but I have rejected much of their teachings, especially with regard of the requirements to enter the Kingdom of God. Believe in the wrong book? To hell with you. Use your genitals a little too much? Ditto. A deathbed confession from a lifelong sadistic rapist and killer? To heaven you go. A fine, loving, kind, upstanding citizen who would give the shirt off his back to a perfect stranger, but who just can't bring themselves to believe in God? Burning fire, for all of eternity.

 

Hogwash.

 

A true, loving God would not send His children to eternal damnation in a pit of fire for having the audacity of not believing something that cannot be proven. I mean think about it. Books written by random, unknown people are elevated to being the literal word of God? How did that happen? Other random, unknown people decided, that's how. They decided that one book is infallible and another isn't worthy of mention. Wow.

[FleshNBones]

Bigotry is a more apt description concerning someone who makes broad judgments about race or gender than ideas. All ideas are not equal. To suggest so is beyond laughable.

There is no exclusion clause in bigotry.

If your comment is valid, I and other must respect those who believe in a flat Earth, and give them as much respect and deference as an astronomer. We must consider a faith-healer as being on equal ground as a medical doctor. Obviously, such is total nonsense.

Keep it coming. You only prove my point.

Too many people have the idea that a Bible-school graduate in theology has as much to say on biology as any Phd. in the field. It is nonsensical and backward to suggest such.

How many Phds in biology do you know? I can make up a few names too.

Another one is whether or not, within the bounds of marriage even, one partner infected with HIV is permitted to wear a condom in order to not infect the other, who is HIV negative. This is the subject of much debate. Really. All of that study and reflection and something so simple must be argued? And somehow thinking people are supposed to respect that?

Would you have sex with a lepper? Is this an issue about the morality of sex, or the stupidity of Russian roulette.

How much did the theological study effect the priests who deny the Holocaust? How does their deep theological knowledge lead them to a conclusion that is so laughable and offensive? Are we to respect their conclusions as much as a historian--let alone an actual victim of the horror?

 

Read about it here: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1060134.html

But don't you mock the Jews.

I have no more respect for a theologian than I do someone who has memorized the permutations of the Star Wars Universe. Both are make-believe, and neither has any effect on reality.

You don't know what reality is, and I know you don't.

[FleshNBones]

A true, loving God would not send His children to eternal damnation in a pit of fire for having the audacity of not believing something that cannot be proven. I mean think about it. Books written by random, unknown people are elevated to being the literal word of God? How did that happen? Other random, unknown people decided, that's how. They decided that one book is infallible and another isn't worthy of mention. Wow.

Maybe this god has a higher standard.

Some people don't want to reach that high.

 

Do you really think everything is contained in a collection of writings? You didn't search very far.

[boogieboy]

I was pretty much raised with christian values and therefore my current moral decisions are based on Christian values.

 

I think to myself, if I didn't feel accountable to God, how would I make my moral judgements?

 

I feel like if I didn't have these moral values based on Christian principles, there would be no "wrong" I could do.

 

I would be completely free to do anything without guilt. (doesn't sound too bad actually)

 

anyway, Atheists, where do you get your moral values/judgements and how do you decipher whats "wrong"?

 

Its easy. I get my morals from previous experience only. As far as deciphering whats wrong, I dont do things that drive people away from me. As far as society, I dont do things that put me in jail. Everything else is fair game. I wont get into accountability to an imaginary being.

[sxyNYCcpl]

Maybe this god has a higher standard.

Some people don't want to reach that high.

 

Perhaps so.

 

If "God" is the type of entity to damn people to an eternity of torture in boiling oil for having the audacity of believing the wrong book, I want nothing to do with him. Were a human leader emerge who issued such punishments, we would rightfully label him (or her) as cruel and inhumane. The same standard applies to the supernatural.

 

And if you believe I should follow YOUR beliefs lest I face damnation, good Sir, to you I say, kiss my lily white ass.

[FleshNBones]

Its easy. I get my morals from previous experience only. As far as deciphering whats wrong, I dont do things that drive people away from me. As far as society, I dont do things that put me in jail. Everything else is fair game. I wont get into accountability to an imaginary being.

I think "Whatever is socially acceptable" would sum it up for the authentic Athiests.

 

The self-righteous would gladly talk about the superior ethic code they derived themselves.

[sally4sara]

Maybe this god has a higher standard.

Some people don't want to reach that high.

Do you really think everything is contained in a collection of writings? You didn't search very far.

 

There it is AGAIN.....more of that need to feel elevated above others.

 

Its like an insecure woman latching on to a misogynist. That feeling of being "one of the few good ones" for being accepted by someone SOOOO exclusive without ever realizing how the alternative means you feel you sux without them and their external validation. You'll do anything to stay in their good graces. Including act like a misogynist to other women; look down your nose at them for not being good enough to be chosen - like you are.

 

So so co-dependent.

[FleshNBones]

If "God" is the type of entity to damn people to an eternity of torture in boiling oil for having the audacity of believing the wrong book, I want nothing to do with him. Were a human leader emerge who issued such punishments, we would rightfully label him (or her) as cruel and inhumane. The same standard applies to the supernatural.

They suffer because they rejected him.

And if you believe I should follow YOUR beliefs lest I face damnation, good Sir, to you I say, kiss my lily white ass.

What you do with your life is your business, but I won't lie to you.

[sxyNYCcpl]

What you do with your life is your business, but I won't lie to you.

 

So please do explain to me at what point in time you became empowered to speak for God. Or are you God?

[dunstable]

I think "Whatever is socially acceptable" would sum it up for the authentic Athiests.

 

The self-righteous would gladly talk about the superior ethic code they derived themselves.

FNB, where do you get your ethic code? From the bible? If so, it was the ethic code that reflected what was socially acceptable in one small part of the world 2000 years ago. Most Christians have taken account of current social norms (that you sneer about), not to mention a host of writings from ancient to modern times on ethical philosophy, and discarded the parts of the bible that conflict with what makes sense to them nowadays.

 

What about you? Do all your ethics come from that one book? Have you read and taken account of anything else? Do you think you may have been influenced by societal norms? Have you been influenced by a subset of societal norms - e.g. the norms of a particular religious sect? What about your own reasoning -- does that play any role? You are very dismissive about society and personal reasoning, so please clarify.