Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 (edited) You've got to respect other people's beliefs - until they impinge on those of others. That's why it's ok imo to believe in creationism, but not ok to apply those beliefs to the extent that you teach it in schools etc. as a valid alternative to scientific understanding. Imo Religious Education is alright, so long as it's giving kids an insight into other people's beliefs and how these beliefs originated etc. It's when they actually start saying that 'this is the truth' about things like the age of the Earth etc. (when it's clearly bollocks) that I start to have grave concerns. And as Fop rightly pointed out, those are in the majority only splitters and religious nutters, but when you come to the to main christian churches is a view neither shared by the Catholic Church nor the main Protestant ones. I have no problem in teaching the biblical creation in a way to make people to respect nature and existence and be careful with our resources etc. This isn't necessarily bound to contradict the big bang. Yes but there seems to be quite a large movement towards that sort of thing in the US. Also, there's a school in Gateshead where they teach that too. That said (like many faith schools) the place in Gateshead gets excellent exam results so who am I to have a go I suppose? Edited March 2, 2007 by alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I see people talking about the universe as if it was a given...We know virtually nothing about the universe. If that's true, how could you possibly know that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 You've got to respect other people's beliefs - until they impinge on those of others. That's why it's ok imo to believe in creationism, but not ok to apply those beliefs to the extent that you teach it in schools etc. as a valid alternative to scientific understanding. Imo Religious Education is alright, so long as it's giving kids an insight into other people's beliefs and how these beliefs originated etc. It's when they actually start saying that 'this is the truth' about things like the age of the Earth etc. (when it's clearly bollocks) that I start to have grave concerns. And as Fop rightly pointed out, those are in the majority only splitters and religious nutters, but when you come to the to main christian churches is a view neither shared by the Catholic Church nor the main Protestant ones. I have no problem in teaching the biblical creation in a way to make people to respect nature and existence and be careful with our resources etc. This isn't necessarily bound to contradict the big bang. That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 8862 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Have you answered my question though Isegrim? What's your honest appraisal of the likelihood of a personal God creating the vast Universe 14 billion years ago purely for the benefit of human living on an insignificant planet on the outer arm of a very ordinary Galaxy? How do you reconcile the text of a book written thousands of years ago with the reality of the Universe we observe today? See there is one of the problems. I don't really care if there is a personal god or not. And who says it was for the benefit? It is just that all we know so far, we are the only species of our kind (well except of those who got abducted by aliens or believing in 12 ft lizards). And as long as we don't know otherwise I don't see a problem in having a humancentric approach to certain things as I think tackling the issues of a peaceful living together and human ethics is more important than on concentrating on the existence of other species somewhere in the universe. We can still easily shift the goal post when the Vulcans come to visit us. Live long and prosper. Well that's an answer of sorts, you're not really interested or bothered, fair enough. However I am interested and bothered by this type of stuff, to me the truth is probably the most important aspect of my existence, and I will do my best to uncover it as much as possible. The question of rather being aware and miserable or happy but ignorant often bothers me for instance, personally I am "wired" to prefer the former. In the same manner, if religion is a pack of lies manufactured by humanity (which I strongly suspect it is), I would want shot of it regardless of the consequences for society. Mind, personally I don't think that the gradual extinction of religion need have any negative impact on soceity, quite the reverse in fact. Note I say "extinction", not abolition. I don't want to force my views on anyone, although I am happy to talk about them and want the unimpeded freedom to do just that. Here we go again, who says I am not really interested in the "truth"? I am all for scientific progress and want things to get explained. This doesn't contradict the need of actual metaphysical and ethical answers. As much as you want your freedom in your scientific beliefs I am advocating to let people have their religious believes as long as they need them. As for the forcing of views on anyone. Isn't science becoming somewhat "religious" in that aspect. The antagonism of evolution/creation being one perfect example. Not that most religious people nowadays in fact believe in evolution, tackling creation with evolution theories that are far from perfect and scientifically proven in every aspect is as much forcing a view on others in my opinion. In my eyes there is a common ground for both thesis (what's the plural in English?) and I don't need any scientist in lecturing me that when you do believe in religion that you are necessarily contradicting science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 8862 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 You've got to respect other people's beliefs - until they impinge on those of others. That's why it's ok imo to believe in creationism, but not ok to apply those beliefs to the extent that you teach it in schools etc. as a valid alternative to scientific understanding. Imo Religious Education is alright, so long as it's giving kids an insight into other people's beliefs and how these beliefs originated etc. It's when they actually start saying that 'this is the truth' about things like the age of the Earth etc. (when it's clearly bollocks) that I start to have grave concerns. And as Fop rightly pointed out, those are in the majority only splitters and religious nutters, but when you come to the to main christian churches is a view neither shared by the Catholic Church nor the main Protestant ones. I have no problem in teaching the biblical creation in a way to make people to respect nature and existence and be careful with our resources etc. This isn't necessarily bound to contradict the big bang. That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. ....yes but we shouldn't drag our little talks down to the lowest common denominator.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Have you answered my question though Isegrim? What's your honest appraisal of the likelihood of a personal God creating the vast Universe 14 billion years ago purely for the benefit of human living on an insignificant planet on the outer arm of a very ordinary Galaxy? How do you reconcile the text of a book written thousands of years ago with the reality of the Universe we observe today? See there is one of the problems. I don't really care if there is a personal god or not. And who says it was for the benefit? It is just that all we know so far, we are the only species of our kind (well except of those who got abducted by aliens or believing in 12 ft lizards). And as long as we don't know otherwise I don't see a problem in having a humancentric approach to certain things as I think tackling the issues of a peaceful living together and human ethics is more important than on concentrating on the existence of other species somewhere in the universe. We can still easily shift the goal post when the Vulcans come to visit us. Live long and prosper. Well that's an answer of sorts, you're not really interested or bothered, fair enough. However I am interested and bothered by this type of stuff, to me the truth is probably the most important aspect of my existence, and I will do my best to uncover it as much as possible. The question of rather being aware and miserable or happy but ignorant often bothers me for instance, personally I am "wired" to prefer the former. In the same manner, if religion is a pack of lies manufactured by humanity (which I strongly suspect it is), I would want shot of it regardless of the consequences for society. Mind, personally I don't think that the gradual extinction of religion need have any negative impact on soceity, quite the reverse in fact. Note I say "extinction", not abolition. I don't want to force my views on anyone, although I am happy to talk about them and want the unimpeded freedom to do just that. Here we go again, who says I am not really interested in the "truth"? I am all for scientific progress and want things to get explained. This doesn't contradict the need of actual metaphysical and ethical answers. As much as you want your freedom in your scientific beliefs I am advocating to let people have their religious believes as long as they need them. As for the forcing of views on anyone. Isn't science becoming somewhat "religious" in that aspect. The antagonism of evolution/creation being one perfect example. Not that most religious people nowadays in fact believe in evolution, tackling creation with evolution theories that are far from perfect and scientifically proven in every aspect is as much forcing a view on others in my opinion. In my eyes there is a common ground for both thesis (what's the plural in English?) and I don't need any scientist in lecturing me that when you do believe in religion that you are necessarily contradicting science. I'm waiting for science to disprove the existence of God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... I agree I think we are wasting our time if we talk about the nutters in both camps.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I'm waiting for Parky to spot the irony of him accusing people of dragging this debate down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I'm waiting for Parky to spot the irony of him accusing people of dragging this debate down You love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Yes, he is a believer in the Rapture, it should scare everyone. Isegrim talks as if religious fundamentalism isn't a problem, but it is a huge one in the only true super power the world has. I might add that atheists in the US are discriminated against more than any other minority group - it is virtually impossible to hold public office there without being demonstrably Christian. And yet its the churches that think they are being persecuted by science! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Yes, he is a believer in the Rapture, it should scare everyone. Isegrim talks as if religious fundamentalism isn't a problem, but it is a huge one in the only true super power the world has. I might add that atheists in the US are discriminated against more than any other minority group - it is virtually impossible to hold public office there without being demonstrably Christian. And yet its the churches that think they are being persecuted by science! To slightly amend that, I'd say it's very difficult to hold public office if you aren't (outwardly at least) religious. Your point still stands though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Yes, he is a believer in the Rapture, it should scare everyone. Isegrim talks as if religious fundamentalism isn't a problem, but it is a huge one in the only true super power the world has. I might add that atheists in the US are discriminated against more than any other minority group - it is virtually impossible to hold public office there without being demonstrably Christian. And yet its the churches that think they are being persecuted by science! I've noticed this especially in the last 4/5 years. Ridiculous in the extreme. Of course now they have discovered that OABAMA went to a Muslim school as a boy....Fox are frothing at the mouth.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Yes, he is a believer in the Rapture, it should scare everyone. Isegrim talks as if religious fundamentalism isn't a problem, but it is a huge one in the only true super power the world has. I might add that atheists in the US are discriminated against more than any other minority group - it is virtually impossible to hold public office there without being demonstrably Christian. And yet its the churches that think they are being persecuted by science! To slightly amend that, I'd say it's very difficult to hold public office if you aren't (outwardly at least) religious. Your point still stands though. But why should that be? Is there an implication that atheists are immoral people? Is so that's not only wrong but utterly disgraceful. Most active atheists are also humanitarians first and foremost and believe passionately in society. I'm not suggesting that religious people don't, but people should realise there is no contradiction in being an atheist and having very high moral values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 That simply isn't true in many countries though, such as most the islamic world and the US. About half the population of the US believe the world is 6000 years old. Many believe Armageddon is imminent. This level of ignorance can only have massive negative effects on mankind and our future on the planet. Yes, and those who believe this and want it taught in America are splitters and nutters, mostly evangelical fundamentalists. This doesn't mean that the main christian churches have a different view point. When it comes to Islam there is a huge diversity in viewpoints regarding creation & evolution and how to fit in Darwin in the Qur'an. But especially western academics have no problem and so have a lot of muslims being brought up in the western world. As for Armageddon, with the latest UN climate report and the human impact on the "creation" they might have a point... Exactly, you're talking from the viewpoint of a western academic. The reality of the situation in the US though is that about half of the population believe in the Bible literally though, a viewpoint that not only contradicts almost every aspect of modern science, but lends itself to horrendous bigotry. Armageddon is becoming a self fulfilling prophecy, there is no motive for people to change their actions on this planet when they are secure in the knowledge that they are promised eternal bliss through salvation, is there? This could be religion's most damaging legacy yet. You don't even have to look at the American population...Dubya himself is well gone on these matters..THAT is frightening. Yes, he is a believer in the Rapture, it should scare everyone. Isegrim talks as if religious fundamentalism isn't a problem, but it is a huge one in the only true super power the world has. I might add that atheists in the US are discriminated against more than any other minority group - it is virtually impossible to hold public office there without being demonstrably Christian. And yet its the churches that think they are being persecuted by science! To slightly amend that, I'd say it's very difficult to hold public office if you aren't (outwardly at least) religious. Your point still stands though. But why should that be? Is there an implication that atheists are immoral people? Is so that's not only wrong but utterly disgraceful. Most active atheists are also humanitarians first and foremost and believe passionately in society. I'm not suggesting that religious people don't, but people should realise there is no contradiction in being an atheist and having very high moral values. God knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Steve_Howey 0 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? That sign in the Trent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? Now were gonna get somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? That sign in the Trent But that's basically true, people have an innate sense of right and wrong which has diddly squat to do with religion. There are many theories on why humans have evolved to be altruistic, and it's not unique to us - there are examples in other animals too. Religion might have initially codified it but now it is entrenched in secular law do we really need religion? Why is i that the most secular nations are the most "civilised"? Why is it that the most religious states in America tend to have the worst crime levels? NJS has argued this point successfully many times as I'm sure you are aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 17531 Posted March 2, 2007 Author Share Posted March 2, 2007 The sign is "Be nice to people, don't be a twat" for the benefit of anyone who doesn't know btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? From people, as did the Bible imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 (edited) Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? That sign in the Trent But that's basically true, people have an innate sense of right and wrong which has diddly squat to do with religion. There are many theories on why humans have evolved to be altruistic, and it's not unique to us - there are examples in other animals too. Religion might have initially codified it but now it is entrenched in secular law do we really need religion? Why is i that the most secular nations are the most "civilised"? Why is it that the most religious states in America tend to have the worst crime levels? NJS has argued this point successfully many times as I'm sure you are aware. Hang on!!!! If people have an 'innate sense of right and wrong' then where the fuck did that come from then? There a morality gene that requires no socialisation or parenting that would kick in to create a moral code in a, for want of a better phrase, 'social vaccuum'? Surely your innate sense of right and wrong is the strongest argument for god so far in this thread? Edited March 2, 2007 by ChezGiven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 (edited) Interesting about high moral codes / standards and being an atheist. The legal system in the UK is to a large extent based on religious laws (our constituion was based on it years back). All of our current moral codes have their roots in religious laws. An individual who acts 'with high moral standards' in our current society (accepted by norms and generally held view) is basically using laws that have been codified into society by religion. Where does the atheist's high moral code come from? What are the main justifications for their rules? That sign in the Trent But that's basically true, people have an innate sense of right and wrong which has diddly squat to do with religion. There are many theories on why humans have evolved to be altruistic, and it's not unique to us - there are examples in other animals too. Religion might have initially codified it but now it is entrenched in secular law do we really need religion? Why is i that the most secular nations are the most "civilised"? Why is it that the most religious states in America tend to have the worst crime levels? NJS has argued this point successfully many times as I'm sure you are aware. Hang on!!!! If people have an 'innate sense of right and wrong' then where the fuck did that come from then? There a morality gene that requires no socialisation or parenting that would kick in to create a moral code in a, for want of a better phrase, 'social vaccuum'? Surely your innate sense of right and wrong is the strongest argument for god so far in this thread? Chez with one light swoop of his pork sword has them by the balls!11 .....enter stage left Descartes.. Edited March 2, 2007 by Parky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now