I clearly stated I intend to be a hypocrite? Where was that exactly?
39 comments
> "This is why evolutionist must borrow concepts like right and wrong from Christianity"
Also, evolution does not need to justify morality.
image
"Let me put it this way, if evolution were true, then any moral claim or thought would just be the result of random chemistry in the brain. "
Let me put it this way, you just displayed your complete ignorance of evolution.
Moral standards are a survival trait. They exist because they help the species survive.
However there are devients who
>> An evolutionist doesn’t get angry when vinegar reacts with baking soda <<
Bullshit! It just really pisses me the fuck OFF
And litmus paper. Aaaarrrgghh!
Evolution would explain why we evolved as a social species, and why an asocial member is less likely to survive.
This make me wonder if a higher proportion of fundies are sociopathic compared to non-fundies. Like sociopaths they don't seem to get how people can have morality without some outside threat making them behave.
Let me put it this way, if evolution were true, then any moral claim or thought would just be the result of random chemistry in the brain.
And yet this doesn't make it worthless. Do you need to get this literally drilled into your cast-iron skulls? Like, get them trepanned and stuff the pages in the hole?
@Qazamir McSmarty Britches:
This may be an example of a subculture psychopath, which is not a true psychopath - they appear to disregard moral standards because they are following a different set of moral standards.
Fundies attract sociopaths because they are so gullible. Fundie leaders, like Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson and the like act religious to con the gullible masses of fundies, this may make it seem like fundies themselves are sociopaths.
"An evolutionist doesn’t get angry when vinegar reacts with baking soda and yet that is just random chemistry."
I only get upset if someone mixes them in one of those little plastic volcanoes. They're ludicrous! That's not how a volcano even works, okay! But everything is just chemistry in the brain, anyhow. The feeling of "love" is simply chemicals that make you feel a certain way. That's just how it is, what're you gonna do?
Why is it so hard to grasp that humans came first, concepts of ethics and morals came to us naturally and humans came up with religion for various reasons? "Right and wrong" hardly comes from Christianity, sorry. Nobody needs to borrow crap.
An evolutionist doesn’t get angry when vinegar reacts with baking soda and yet that is just random chemistry.
Chemistry is random? That's news to me. So, if I combine sodium and chlorine I'll only sometimes get salt and other times I'll get something entirely different like water or carbon dioxide?
But how does someone determine if chemistry is good or bad?
Chemistry is neither good nor bad, it's just chemistry. It's the actions of a person that are judged. And even if we live in an entirely deterministic world with no free will, actions still have consequences. Just as an asteroid that hits a planet is likely to be destroyed so a murderer that murders is likely to be put in jail.
This is why evolutionist must borrow concepts like right and wrong from Christianity
Ooooh.... this "right" and "wrong" thing... Christianity bases it on a "what I say it is right now" attitude from a capricious and downright egotistical being.
Did you know that ripping unborn from the mothers womb is Good, according to the Bible? Abortion is moral by that argument... yet according to Christianity, it is wrong. Did you know that a Christian CANNOT charge any form of interest or fee for a loan...? It's in the Bible that doing so is Bad... so it's WRONG.
Want to guess just how many Financial Corporations are a: Christian owned/led and also b: refuse to charge any kind of interest or fee...? Not fucking many...
You don't even know what Right and Wrong are, so just how arrogant must you be to preach to others about how they don't know??
"In a chance universe where we are nothing more then chemical reactions, why bother even making a moral claim?"
You Fail:
Physics
And by extension, Anthropology, Law, Civics, and History.
One could find a more enlightened debating partner among the severely Autistic, since a parrot could be trained to repeat your talking points and demonstrate as much understanding as you have.
If you hold a job more demanding than filling shopping bags, either you're an idiot savant, or your employer overlooks your vast deficiencies and eccentricities of belief.
"Why is it that hypocrisy should be considered wrong? Who gets to decide that and why?"
Jesus hates hypocrites.
And the fact that we Atheists are more than infinitely [i]superior[/i] to you right-wing Funda[i]mental[/i]ist Christains in [i]every[/i] conceivable way , means that we can judge you lot when any of you stray from the narrow path of righteousness, and are anything less than more than perfect than your Jesus in word, actions & thoughts.
Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Faggard, Kent Hovind et al ring any bells, Mike?
US prison population:
Christian: 80%
Atheist: 0.02%
Vinegar doesn't tell you to not do something, then go and do it itself . Use of bad analogy. Your argument is invalid . Oh, do keep up, 007! [/'Q']
Moral: Chemistry =/= Morality (pun may or may not be intended).
This is why evolutionist must borrow concepts like right and wrong from Christianity,
Why Christianity? Didn't Christianity base its ethics on Judaism and Greek thought? And what, while we're on the subject, is the connection between evolution and morality?
Here, let me explain.
We have morals because humans are social animals. We live in family and tribal units. In far flung ancient times, if you behaved immorally towards a member of your pack or tribe, it had the potential to hurt your own chances for survival.
This instinctual need to behave properly around our own social unit led to behaving altruistically towards other, neighboring social units in order to strengthen everyone's chances for survival.
Case in point, Humans don't need God to be moral because there was and is an evolutionary advantage to be so.
How is that the ancient Greeks were able to philosophize about right and wrong, and "the Good", despite predating Christ, if all notions of right and wrong issue from Christianity?
“Let me put it this way, if gravity was true, then any moral claim or thought would just be the result of random attraction of celestial bodies.”
Chemistry is very far from random, stupid.
We do NOT borrow concepts of right and wrong from Christianity, stupid. Both concepts predates Christianity by hundreds of thousands of years. Plus, to Christianity, right equals "what God tells me to do" and wrong equals "what God tells med not to do. Both can be to kill someone, so no moral absolutes here.
Qazamir McSmarty Britches at #1582669 This make me wonder if a higher proportion of fundies are sociopathic compared to non-fundies. Like sociopaths they don't seem to get how people can have morality without some outside threat making them behave.
I'd have to say that you might be right.http://www.jasonlisle.com/2012/11/09/deep-time-the-god-of-our-age/comment-page-3/#comment-5463
the ignored: “About morality: All I see is that the xian worldview is a sociopathic one where caring about others, society in general are not motivators for you. You need god to tell you right from wrong.”
Actually in the atheistic worldview, there is nothing inherently wrong with being a “sociopath”. Because if the universe is all there is, then there is no such thing as “right” or “wrong”.
The universe is amoral if God does not exist. So being a sociopath should be no more disgusting than being an outstanding citizen. But the fact that you do believe being a sociopath is disgusting shows that you do hold to a moral standard. And it’s a moral standard that you expect all humans to abide by. But where did you get this idea that all humans should be subject to the same moral standards? This is easily explainable in the biblical worldview, but it makes no sense in the atheist’s worldview.
Then of course, there's William Lane Craig's defense of fucking infanticide:http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/04/30/wait-i-thought-they-believed-i/
Evolution is a theory that involves biology, not morality. Now, from the point of view of psychology, hypocrisy has a lot of inconveniences, which is why is so universally condemned. Chemistry or not, hypocrisy is indicative of worrying implications. One of them is that the rule is defective or difficult to put in practice. If the promoter him or herself is unable to put it in practice, why should people who don't completely agree do?.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
