Increase of Atheists around the world, increase of crime any coincidence?

[upant]

You seem to gloss over the only relevant point, that doing the wrong thing is actually wrong, and skip straight to saying ‘Hey, our system is better because the punishments are formally accepted’.

You don’t have a system, you have personal choice. You talk about individuals and I am talking systems.

Again you can’t define wrong on a system wide basis because there is no formal code of conduct. One person’s wrong conduct can be right conduct in the eyes of another.

As to the contents of the moral code, then if we differ in any aspect then give me your reasons why you think I am wrong and you are right and we can discuss them.

Your individual code isn’t the discussion. I am saying the atheistic system doesn’t have a moral code and individuals are free to do what they want. They can create their own or not have one.

 

[Freddy]

Your individual code isn’t the discussion. I am saying the atheistic system doesn’t have a moral code and individuals are free to do what they want. They can create their own or not have one.

There is no ‘atheistic system’ so obviously there is no ‘atheistic code’. But do you really think that there are no other moral codes other than religious ones? Seriously?

One assumes that you have made a conscious choice that Catholicism is a moral code that makes sense to you. In fact, it cannot be simply an assumption. You obviously wouldn’t follow a moral code that you thought was nonsense. And I would appreciate you granting me the same consideration. That what I do I do because it makes sense to me.

And no-one is free to do what they want. Unless their moral code is actually: ‘I will ignore the wishes and rights of everyone and live life as I please’. Maybe you know someone like that. I doubt it.

So yeah, if one hasn’t got a ready made set of rules and obligations then one needs to develop one. Easy it ain’t. Mistakes will be made. Decisions once cast in stone will need to be discarded. Arguments will need to be developed. Soul searching needs to be done. Honesty needs to be addressed. Contrary views need to be examined. All of this and more. And you have the temerity to deny that and say ‘Well, you can just do as you please’.

You seem utterly oblivious as to how moral positions are determined.

 

[Pattylt]

May I also add…if I lived on a desert island all by myself, yeah, I could make any rules I want to. Actually, so could you. But, we don’t. We live amongst others and we want to live as fully and peaceably as everyone else does. Just because we don’t answer to a higher authority doesn’t mean we don’t have to live without rules. Society itself makes the rules and shapes our morality.

I’m often frustrated with statements declaring we can do whatever we want! So can you or do you deny free will? We live with consequences, they may be different than confession or Hell, instead our consequences are self respect, honesty and striving to ensure a future society that everyone can want to live in…not just Catholics.

 

[upant]

There is no ‘atheistic system’ so obviously there is no ‘atheistic code’. But do you really think that there are no other moral codes other than religious ones? Seriously?

I don’t believe that a random existence requires or produces a moral code. You have only defined yours based on feelings. I understand this because I believe all mankind has the law of God placed on their hearts. This is what drives people to try and define their own code.

That what I do I do because it makes sense to me.

Exactly my point, atheistic morals are based on the individual. You call this code of conduct morals, and they may be to you, but what makes sense to you may make no sense to someone else. This is how you try to fill the void in your heart.

They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts. Their consciences confirm this. Their competing thoughts will either accuse or excuse them (Romans 2:15)

You seem utterly oblivious as to how moral positions are determined.

on the contrary, your morals are man-made and they can change from person to person, city-to-city, nation-to-nation.

I don’t determine the morals I follow, they are set in stone.

The problem is that without God anything the majority or individual decides can be moral, e.g. abortion, sex outside of marriage, etc.

And no-one is free to do what they want. Unless their moral code is actually: ‘I will ignore the wishes and rights of everyone and live life as I please’. Maybe you know someone like that. I doubt it.

What stops people from doing what they want? peer pressure? societal rules? the majority?

The problem with this line of reasoning is that people don’t have to agree with it. They may toe-the-line legally but that doesn’t mean they agree or have a moral code. What makes their opinion wrong and yours right? The papers are full of people doing what they want with little care for the consequences.

Just because we don’t answer to a higher authority doesn’t mean we don’t have to live without rules. Society itself makes the rules and shapes our morality.

what is your obligation to follow these rules? what happens when you decide, I want other rules? we have legal child sacrifice, is this moral?

I’m often frustrated with statements declaring we can do whatever we want! So can you or do you deny free will? We live with consequences, they may be different than confession or Hell, instead our consequences are self respect, honesty and striving to ensure a future society that everyone can want to live in…not just Catholics.

when a Christian breaks the rules (free will), there are eternal consequences if they don’t repent.

your temporal consequences are self-imposed, but why beat yourself up, who is your judge?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

There is no ‘atheistic system’ so obviously there is no ‘atheistic code’. But do you really think that there are no other moral codes other than religious ones? Seriously?

I don’t believe that a random existence requires or produces a moral code. You have only defined yours based on feelings.

No. On reasons. I can’t do something just because it feels good. Or avoid something just because it feels bad.

As I said, you seem unaware of the process of developing a moral code. The rest of your post simply confirms this.

 

[upant]

As I said, you seem unaware of the process of developing a moral code. The rest of your post simply confirms this.

I deny that man is the author of the moral code. men make laws, what good is a law that has no eternal consequence or authority. all you have described involves feelings. feelings aren’t grounded and change. we have seen that, over and over again.

you haven’t answered the example of abortion, is it moral or not? some atheists think it is and some think it isn’t. who is right and who decides?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

As I said, you seem unaware of the process of developing a moral code. The rest of your post simply confirms this.

I deny that man is the author of the moral code. men make laws, what good is a law that has no eternal consequence or authority. all you have described involves feelings. feelings aren’t grounded and change. we have seen that, over and over again.

Do you not read what I write? I said that one develops a moral code using reason. I’ve said that and repeated it a number of times. Why are you ignoring that?

 

[upant]

Do you not read what I write? I said that one develops a moral code using reason. I’ve said that and repeated it a number of times. Why are you ignoring that?

I am not ignoring it, I disagree. You have your opinion and I have mine. I believe morals are eternal, morality from reason has changed over time and will change again. Morality from reason allows abortion and sex outside of marriage to be both moral and immoral. That doesn’t work.

which reasoning is right and who is the judge?

 

[Freddy]

which reasoning is right and who is the judge?

You find out which reasoning is right by discussing it. By reaching agreement. By finding common ground.

And as to who decides, then you can tell me. Who decided that Catholic morality was the one you needed to follow? Did someone else decide it for you? Or did you make that decision yourself?

 

[upant]

You find out which reasoning is right by discussing it. By reaching agreement. By finding common ground.

But there is no common ground on abortion or sex outside marriage. So which side is moral?

Morals aren’t changeable, either something is good or it is bad. It is not up for discussion.

And as to who decides, then you can tell me. Who decided that Catholic morality was the one you needed to follow? Did someone else decide it for you? Or did you make that decision yourself?

God gave us these morals, we don’t choose them. We obey them or we don’t. God’s laws are universal. You have a personal code of conduct. I follow the universal law.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

You find out which reasoning is right by discussing it. By reaching agreement. By finding common ground.

But there is no common ground on abortion or sex outside marriage. So which side is moral?

Morals aren’t changeable, either something is good or it is bad. It is not up for discussion.

And as to who decides, then you can tell me. Who decided that Catholic morality was the one you needed to follow? Did someone else decide it for you? Or did you make that decision yourself?

God gave us these morals, we don’t choose them. We obey them or we don’t. God’s laws are universal. You have a personal code of conduct. I follow the universal law.

If there is no common ground then reason dictates. If sex is always wrong outside marriage then give me reasons for that position. If they are better than my reasons then I will change my mind. Fair enough?

And as to whether you chose your moral code or it was chosen for you, it appears that it was the latter. God is said to have commanded it so it must be right. But do there need to be reasons why it is right as well? If there are then I want to know what they are, because I don’t believe in God. If there are no reasons then we have nothing to discuss because you have no argument.

 

[QwertyGirl]

you haven’t answered the example of abortion, is it moral or not? some atheists think it is and some think it isn’t. who is right and who decides?

You seem to have a need that everyone follow the same moral code. I don’t understand it. Is your need based solely in your religious understandings, or is there more psychology to it?

 

[upant]

If there is no common ground then reason dictates. If sex is always wrong outside marriage then give me reasons for that position. If they are better than my reasons then I will change my mind. Fair enough?

Morals that change are useless. Why follow them if tomorrow the majority can change them. The reasons are the same as when it was immoral by society in times pass. The simple answer is that it destroys the family unit.

God is said to have commanded it so it must be right. But do there need to be reasons why it is right as well?

Without God, there is no right and wrong, There is no moral code because right and wrong means something different to each individual. You have a personal code. You have a desire or a need for morals but why? It really means nothing. You are striving for something that there is no foundation for in your world.

You seem to have a need that everyone follow the same moral code. I don’t understand it. Is your need based solely in your religious understandings, or is there more psychology to it?

What good is your code if something can be both good and evil to different people. Abortion was immoral and now many consider it moral. It can’t be both. This is a major cause of the conflict in the world today.

Morals are for all mankind not individuals.

One set of rules for all. The world would be a better place if everyone followed the same set of rules.

 

[QwertyGirl]

One set of rules for all. The world would be a better place if everyone followed the same set of rules.

But this will never be, because we are all different. So why be miserable and argue about it?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

If there is no common ground then reason dictates. If sex is always wrong outside marriage then give me reasons for that position. If they are better than my reasons then I will change my mind. Fair enough?

Morals that change are useless. Why follow them if tomorrow the majority can change them. The reasons are the same as when it was immoral by society in times pass. The simple answer is that it destroys the family unit.

God is said to have commanded it so it must be right. But do there need to be reasons why it is right as well?

Without God, there is no right and wrong, There is no moral code because right and wrong means something different to each individual. You have a personal code. You have a desire or a need for morals but why? It really means nothing. You are striving for something that there is no foundation for in your world.

But you gave a reason for why sex outside marriage is wrong. And then went on to say that without God there is no right or wrong. If what you said about it was reasonable and correct then it’s reasonable and correct without any need to refer to God. Do you see what I mean? Sex outside marriage is not wrong because God says so (although He might). It’s wrong because you think it destroys the family unit.

Now we have your reason, it’s something that we can discuss to see if your argument is worth considering.

And your argument in quite a few cases would be correct. If I had sex with someone other than my wife then I would be breaking the trust that we have with each other. But if we weren’t married - and I doubt if the Catholic church would consider the ceremony that we went through to be valid, yet we were as comitted to each other as we are (and a few decades of being together would confirm that) then having sex without being married is no problem. The family always has been and still is fine.

But maybe you were thinking about adultery.

 

[EndTimes]

“Increase of atheists around the world, increase of crime any coincidence”

Not a coincidence, per se . Rather - a connection…

Clearly illustrated in Prophecy of what Must come to pass as time marches on…

_

 

[HarryStotle]

We can agree on which aspects of our moralities are common. Don’t steal. Don’t murder. And those we disagree on - sex before marriage for example, we can discuss. You put forward arguments and I do the same.

If one of your arguments is ‘Because God says so’ then I will ignore it. If one of your arguments is ‘God says so because…X’ then we can discuss it.

I see. So your argument is that any mere reference to God disqualifies the argument.

How is your position any stronger?

You claim that adding the clause, “because…X,” provides a warrant for you to take the argument seriously. So how is the certainty of X determined? On what grounds, precisely?

If I were to claim X is true or X reflects reality, you might be prone to accept it. But then if I were to further assert X is true because it aligns with the Truth or reflects Reality, given a further premise that God=Truth or God=Reality, you dismiss it by fiat.

How do you know God ≠ Reality or God ≠ Truth? Is there such a thing as Truth or what is true? Such thing as Reality or reality?

If so, how would we know it when we encounter it?

If not, then on what objective basis is any proposition to be accepted?

You disallow God by dictat, but fail to provide any grounds for determining truth value except what is acceptable to you.

Seems a bit loaded in terms of argumentation, no?

If you say that you are committed to following your moral code (for whatever reason) so therefore yours is better then I will see if that is true by asking you if you always follow yours.

Quite simple really.

I suppose that would depend upon the nature of the moral code. If you want to claim that a moral code is best determined by the capacity of its promoters to follow it, then it appears you favour weak moral codes by that very presumption.

Eat, drink and be merry! would seem to be the epitome of morality according to your lights.

Courage in adversity, for example, would then take a moral back seat to Run away when you feel afraid.

I mean, the quality of being easy to “always follow” would entail moral mediocrity and sloth, no?

Clearly, it isn’t worth my while to try to convince you otherwise, since I would have to not only have to convince you but also invigorate, exhilarate, galvanize, energize, and animate you all at once.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

We can agree on which aspects of our moralities are common. Don’t steal. Don’t murder. And those we disagree on - sex before marriage for example, we can discuss. You put forward arguments and I do the same.

If one of your arguments is ‘Because God says so’ then I will ignore it. If one of your arguments is ‘God says so because…X’ then we can discuss it.

I see. So your argument is that any mere reference to God disqualifies the argument.

Yep. If you have reasons for following a particular moral code then I want to hear them. If you think that God has reasons then I want to hear what you think they are. If the only reasons you follow that code are ‘Because God commands it…’ then we have nothing to talk about.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Freddy:

We can agree on which aspects of our moralities are common. Don’t steal. Don’t murder. And those we disagree on - sex before marriage for example, we can discuss. You put forward arguments and I do the same.

If one of your arguments is ‘Because God says so’ then I will ignore it. If one of your arguments is ‘God says so because…X’ then we can discuss it.

I see. So your argument is that any mere reference to God disqualifies the argument.

Yep. If you have reasons for following a particular moral code then I want to hear them. If you think that God has reasons then I want to hear what you think they are. If the only reasons you follow that code are ‘Because God commands it…’ then we have nothing to talk about.

I don’t subscribe to divine command theory.

God is Being Itself. The nature of existence arises from the nature of Being.

The only way to ground morality in reality is if Being is fundamentally purposeful and moral value is integral to existence. Absent that, you have no grounds for morality.

You, as an atheist, have no grounds for morality in reality because if ultimate reality is blind, purposeless matter, it makes no difference, ultimately, what happens to any of us, if your worldview is true.

That is why I prefer my world view to yours. It justifies moral beliefs. Yours does not.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

HarryStotle:

Freddy:

We can agree on which aspects of our moralities are common. Don’t steal. Don’t murder. And those we disagree on - sex before marriage for example, we can discuss. You put forward arguments and I do the same.

If one of your arguments is ‘Because God says so’ then I will ignore it. If one of your arguments is ‘God says so because…X’ then we can discuss it.

I see. So your argument is that any mere reference to God disqualifies the argument.

Yep. If you have reasons for following a particular moral code then I want to hear them. If you think that God has reasons then I want to hear what you think they are. If the only reasons you follow that code are ‘Because God commands it…’ then we have nothing to talk about.

I don’t subscribe to divine command theory.

God is Being Itself. The nature of existence arises from the nature of Being.

The only way to ground morality in reality is if Being is fundamentally purposeful and moral value is integral to existence. Absent that, you have no grounds for morality.

You, as an atheist, have no grounds for morality in reality because if ultimate reality is blind, purposeless matter, it makes no difference, ultimately, what happens to any of us, if your worldview is true.

That is why I prefer my world view to yours. It justifies moral beliefs. Yours does not.

But do go on being deluded.

I understand your world view, Harry. And respect it. And I understand that it can justify the reasons for your moral beliefs.

But if you want to discuss morality then I’ll need those reasons. If you don’t have any or don’t want to give them and you’d prefer to trot out platitudes about purposeless matter and meaningless existence etc then go for it.

If you change your mind then I’ll be around.