Atheism plays a large role (perhaps one of the biggest) in the destruction of western civilization. It is one of the root causes for the degeneracy and overall moral decline we see today.
It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism, which makes it possible to morally rationalize any action (i.e. moral relativism), as can be seen with the LGBTQ movement. This acronym is constantly evolving (currently at LGBTQQIP2SAA if I'm not mistaken), and I believe it's just a matter of time before pedophilia and bestiality are integrated as well (in-before muh slippery slope).
I expect some people to challenge the notion that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism. I've had this debate before, and they usually resort to: "It's in our biology. A product of evolution that is innate in all humans. Empathy." The problem with this argument is that it begets the question: Whose "biology" are we talking about? People seem to have different concepts of what is wrong and what isn't. Who is right? What society? Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution.
I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism. Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible. Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
Atheists proclaim to be intellectually superior and have an aptitude for logical and critical thinking, yet they fail to understand something so simple. It just boggles my mind.
>>76751899
Fuck off.
>>76751899
totally agree. they are all fucking autists.
>>76752171
no u.
>Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution.
Funny, since you just said Atheism is incompatible with a "moral universalism" and then admit that there can't be such a thing.
lol sweden. Makes sense that you've been overrun with Muslims and now you hate atheists. Try and focus on your real problems.
When do you all decide to wake up
When will you finally realize what you've been ignoring as a given for so long
Every party and individual, faction, and school you can think of is unequipped, inefficient, and simply incapable of meeting the goals we REALLY need to be focused on, which, to prevent confusion, are the same goals you have in mind, I should let you know
Civilization beyond a certain point is folly, the tower is built too tall, and it collapses, and nothing escapes this fate, like trying to fix everything with duct tape, it only works for so long
So long as you take to factions and different sides of the single dichotomy you will not understand
>>76752354
I was speaking from an atheistic perspective. Put two and two together.
>>76752367
I hate heathens and heretics alike (i.e. muslims).
>>76751899
like any other belief retards will corrupt and twist it to motivate their retarded and degenerate actions
God isn't real.
Facts override feelings.
>>76753116
>Facts override feelings.
So why let empathy decide how you act? If you can get away with theft, why not steal? If you can get away with rape, why not rape? See how your degenerate worldview is a problem for western civilization?
>>76751899
>Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
I've never understood why people think the logic has to go there, as if we are to be purely machines of logic alone and not emotional animals with a shared interest in maintaining society at a certain standard for mutual benefit.
I have my catholic grandparents to thank for laying down basic morality when I was young as something to be maintained for it's own sake as the right thing to do. Even without faith as an adult, the idea of trying to be a good person because that's what you do has never left me, only wavered in my edgy teen 'fuck bush lol' years. It doesn't need a perfect logical underpinning to be an idea we all get behind, whatever our reasons for getting there.
>>76753762
>Let's ignore logic when it isn't in our favor.
t. atheist
The intellectual dishonesty is strong in you.
Game theory explains morality much better than god can. It's not hard to understand that you will survive longer and thus have more chances to produce offspring if you're not trying to kill every one of you come across and betraying the trust of people around you.
And you're mistaking atheism (something very simple which has been hijacked by fedoras and redditors and spun into a pseudo-belief system) with nihilism. Not every atheist is a nihilist. And not every nihilist rejects ethics as a whole.
>It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral universalism, which makes it possible to morally rationalize any action (i.e. moral relativism), as can be seen with the LGBTQ movement. This acronym is constantly evolving (currently at LGBTQQIP2SAA if I'm not mistaken), and I believe it's just a matter of time before pedophilia and bestiality are integrated as well (in-before muh slippery slope).
Stop reaching so goddamn hard. Uneducated masses with too much time on their hands and access to the internet is the problem, not the fact that someone doesn't believe in your god.
>>76754035
Who cares though? Whatever it takes to get an individual to act like a decent person in a civilization, be it anti-logic or deep faith or ignorance or sense of superiority. We're not inherently logical creatures no matter what fedora-tippers or whomever wish to believe, we operate on whatever works.
>>76754064
>Game theory explains morality much better than god can. It's not hard to understand that you will survive longer and thus have more chances to produce offspring if you're not trying to kill every one of you come across and betraying the trust of people around you.
Doesn't account for the times when you can get away with something. If you can get away with theft, why not steal? If the murder of a person will benefit you in any way, and you can get away with it, why not murder?
When there is no inherent value to life beyond what value you personally assign to it, and there is no life beyond this fleeting life, then logically your own life becomes priceless and should be preserved above everything else at all costs.
>Not every atheist is a nihilist. And not every nihilist rejects ethics as a whole.
Only the rational atheists do. The atheists who don't are just sticking their heads in the sand.
>Uneducated masses with too much time on their hands and access to the internet is the problem, not the fact that someone doesn't believe in your god.
No, the problem lies with non-christians.
daily reminder that /pol/ is a christian board.
post DEUS VULT
>>76754462
>Who cares though?
Who cares about logic? Quite a lot of people, especially those of an intelligent variety.
>Whatever it takes to get an individual to act like a decent person in a civilization
Who decides what's decent? You?
>We're not inherently logical creatures no matter what fedora-tippers or whomever wish to believe, we operate on whatever works.
And atheism doesn't.
>When religious people start talking about morality
God is the source of your "morality".
It is morally right to help people who are suffering or in need.
Suffering and people in need still exist.
So the conclusion should be -
God isn't moral or god doesn't exist.
Have fun.
>>76754730
>It is morally right to help people who are suffering or in need.
That's just your opinion. It has no transcendental basis whatsoever.
>>76754679
Your game is weak, Sven.
>>76751899
wow they let you out to post?
>>76751899
It's painfully obvious how destructive and hindering atheism is to knowledge and progress as a society as you laid out and the numerous instances of atheist "Utopias" that are and end up in massive bloodshed third world hell holes. Every evil act that has and will happen comes from an atheistic heart/mindset regardless of what the individual identifies as. They are self-deceived and it isn't too mind boggling for the natural man is at enmity with God. They are unable to understand nor want to the things of God. Only the Gospel message of faith alone in Christ alone for forgiveness of sins changes a man's heart or hardens it further depending on who God has elected to be his child.
>>76751899
>current year
>caring about (x)
>>76754911
So you're saying suffering is god's work?
>>76754916
You have no rebuttal so I must be trolling. Got it.
>>76755088
>So you're saying suffering is god's work?
Yes, it is.
>>76751899
Atheism might be degenerate, but christianity is not the answer
>>76755183
So god isn't good?
>>76755107
Shitposts beget shitposts, if you weren't simply making this thread to troll hardcore fedorakids you'd get a more thoughtful dialogue going between anons. Instead you begin from a position of absolute certainty and talk down anyone with another point of view. Enjoy the thread, and the next one, and the next one, and the next one.
>>76755431
what humans (which are imperfect and fallible) think is good =/= the real Good, which is God's will
>>76755023
OP btfo
>>76755431
Why are you even talking about good and evil as an atheist?
Agree. It is the core of degeneracy.
>>76751899
Why is it so shattering to find out there is no omnipotent force? Or if there is, it doesn't give a shit about you personally?
>>76755534
>Instead you begin from a position of absolute certainty and talk down anyone with another point of view.
Except I asked you here >>76754679 about who decides what's decent and what isn't. You didn't answer. You're the shitposter, not me.
>>76755554
>God works in mysterious ways
Not an argument.
>>76755618
What do you mean?
You don't need a god who created evil to make sure you suffer to not like suffering.
No one likes bad shit happening to them.
I was just pointing out that evil in itself is proof enough that god doesn't exist.
If God knows evil is going on and does nothing - he is not good.
If God doesn't know evil is going on he is not all powerful.
If he knows evil is going on and can't stop it he is not god.
>>76754466
>Doesn't account for the times when you can get away with something. If you can get away with theft, why not steal? If the murder of a person will benefit you in any way, and you can get away with it, why not murder?
Because I have been raised to not do that. It goes against my moral code, or programming if you want to use that word. Very rarely will you ever get away with committing something as heinous as murder anyway, so it's an irrelevant example.
>When there is no inherent value to life beyond what value you personally assign to it, and there is no life beyond this fleeting life, then logically your own life becomes priceless and should be preserved above everything else at all costs.
I never said there is no inherent value to life beyond what I give it. I never said I don't believe in a life after this life. Atheism is not a belief system. The lack of belief in a diety =/= no morals/do whatever you want/nothing happens after you die.
>No, the problem lies with non-christians.
Ok bud, deus vult and all that.
>>76755795
>who decides what's decent and what isn't
People, through the action of laws. What other answer do you want, kingly decree or holy proclamation? Not everyone agrees, but enough do to set basic guidelines that we all think are right enough to pass.
And considering this exact thread is a daily fixture on pg1, I'd say you're the bigger shitposter overall.
>>76756066
>You don't need a god who created evil to make sure you suffer to not like suffering.
Why is suffering bad? Because you said so?
>No one likes bad shit happening to them.
Some people actually do. How's that an argument though? Why is it immoral for me to cause another person to suffer if it's beneficial to me?
>I was just pointing out that evil in itself is proof enough that god doesn't exist.
There is no "evil" without an absolute moral authority.
>If God knows evil is going on and does nothing - he is not good.
>If God doesn't know evil is going on he is not all powerful.
>If he knows evil is going on and can't stop it he is not god.
This argument. Evil has a purpose (as do suffering). God didn't create it because he's maleficent, but because it helps us grow. He has no intention of stopping evil until we are fully learned.
>>76751899
the only proper way to become an atheist and not someone who simply doesn't care about religion (agnostic) is to either deconvert or look at both sides equally if you weren't raised with religion.
I was a practicing Catholic for the first 18 years of my life, but when I started studying philosophy/logic and debating atheists I realized the logical flaws in Christianity/Catholicism and had to accept the correct side since I'm an honest person to myself and others. I was using proper arguments and making sure I avoided fallacies, yet my side was usually proven wrong in different ways I couldn't counter.
I went to a Jesuit high school so I received a good education with lots of religious courses (a couple general religion courses with a course on apologetics and a course on scriptures). The problem wasn't I didn't understand my side well; it was that I understood my side too well and started to see the faults.
>>76756283
>People, through the action of laws.
People don't agree. Laws are different from country to country. Who are correct? What country?
>Not everyone agrees, but enough do to set basic guidelines that we all think are right enough to pass.
Argumentum ad populum. Just because the majority agree on something, it doesn't make it correct. Atheism and moral universalism are incompatible.
>>76751899
So I should just believe in some god or some religion of your choice just not to be degenerate?
>>76756581
>Why is suffering bad? Because you said so?
No. Because if I make people suffer I go to hell.
>Why is it immoral for me to cause another person to suffer if it's beneficial to me?
Because you'll go to hell.
>There is no "evil" without an absolute moral authority.
So god makes me suffer and if I make someone else suffer I go to hell. Like what type of morals are those?
>He has no intention of stopping evil until we are fully learned.
Fully learned? Fully learned what?
>>76756074
>Because I have been raised to not do that.
So you've just been brainwashed. Because logically speaking, there's no real reason for you to abide by these arbitrary rules if you can get avoid the repercussions from breaking them.
>Very rarely will you ever get away with committing something as heinous as murder anyway, so it's an irrelevant example.
You can get away with lying on a daily basis. How do you combat that one?
>I never said there is no inherent value to life beyond what I give it.
So the suffering argument is just arbitrary. It doesn't matter.
>Ok bud, deus vult and all that.
Catholicism and protestantism are both heresy, so no.
>>76756883
If you don't believe in God, you're a degenerate. Yes.
>>76752171
delete your account
>>76757066
Well I would if he existed. And I hate Islam can't fake being Muslim too hard
>>76756706
>but when I started studying philosophy/logic and debating atheists I realized the logical flaws in Christianity/Catholicism and had to accept the correct side since I'm an honest person to myself and others.
You went from having a basis for morality to not. Good job. Now you're free to do whatever you want. Lie, cheat, steal. It makes no difference. Atheism is a cop-out for people who want to live a hedonistic lifestyle, and not be held accountable for their actions and choices.
>>76757091
not an argument
>>76757180
The swedish dude is probably a muslim.
Most christfags give up on arguing after you drop the suffering argument.
Islam is more compatible with an immoral, vengeful god.
God isn't real, stop being a fag about it.
deuce vault
>>76757066
"Gods behave just like the people that create them"
God exists just as much as Sauron, but I agee with you if some people need to worship an imaginary being in order for their lives to have meaning then they may as well do as long as they don't start killing the non-believrs like the Sikhs for example, they seem pretty chill.
>>76751899
No sources.
No arguments.
>>76757350
>The swedish dude is probably a muslim.
A muslim would never call islam heresy. I did.
>Most christfags give up on arguing after you drop the suffering argument.
Maybe it's because they grow tired of debating with people who don't understand moral relativism/universalism.
>>76757538
>Needs a source for logic or arguments
Good one.
>>76757277
>Now you're free to do whatever you want.
This is the scariest bit about religiousfags. You would do unspeakable things if one day you truly stopped believing in god. OR think god wants you do to unspeakable things. That's fucking mental.
I personally try to be a nice person because, well, I don't like other people being dicks to me.
>>76757277
>Now you're free to do whatever you want. Lie, cheat, steal.
Except I choose not to do those things. I tell the truth because I hate lying, I play by the rules because it's fair, and I purchase whatever item I want from someone that'll accept my offer otherwise they'd have nothing and I'd have everything, which is immoral.
I don't have to believe in God to do those things. I just do because it makes everyone's lives easier.
>>76751899
>LE FUCKING DEGENERACY MEME :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
>>76757277
I'm not free to do whatever I want. Laws and societal norms restrict me from doing many things.
Without religion, there are no sides. How you behave is dependent on your conditioning, and what you choose to do is what you believe is correct unless you are in a bad situation where what you choose to do might be influenced by this situation.
Atheism is not a cop-out for the person who arrives there by debating. I definitely do not agree with hedonism, as in my everyday life I try to be as utilitarian as possible. Generalizing all atheists as hedonists is obviously fallacious.
I know I'm accountable for my actions because my actions have consequences. I don't need a deity to know this simple fact, as I just need to use logic.
If God is real show me proof that he did something, if not he either doesen't exist or he doesen't do anything which is equal to not existing.
>>76757744
>This is the scariest bit about religiousfags. You would do unspeakable things if one day you truly stopped believing in god.
No I wouldn't. But you see the thing is, what's stopping you? Really? Why not rape someone if you can get away with it? Like really? Empathy? Reason supersedes emotion, doesn't it? Just because you stick your head in the sand and ignore logic it doesn't make it go away.
>I personally try to be a nice person because, well, I don't like other people being dicks to me.
What's nice and not is a matter of opinion. Let's say a person is genetically superior. He has high intelligence, good symmetrical facial features, high test, etc. He's a perfect partner for procreation. Isn't it "nice" of him to then rape an ugly, obese woman who wants to get pregnant? He's doing her a favor. With atheism (and moral relativism), you can morally justify any action. You just have to do some mental gymnastics.
Oh, it's one of THESE threads.
>>76751899
Damn good points, Sven.
There's nothing wrong with atheism, agnosticism, theological noncognitivism, etc. as long as they're used responsibly.
>>76753237
So because the consequences of truth might be bad, we should all lie? I can't get behind that.
>>76757878
>Except I choose not to do those things
Why not? If you can get away with it, it's the most rational choice. Aren't you rational?
>I tell the truth because I hate lying
Why do you hate lying?
>I play by the rules because it's fair
Why do you care about fairness? Life isn't fair. Everything is up for grabs.
>I purchase whatever item I want from someone that'll accept my offer otherwise they'd have nothing and I'd have everything, which is immoral.
That it's immoral is just your opinion, is it not?
>I don't have to believe in God to do those things.
No, you don't. But following arbitrary rules just for shits and giggles is completely irrational.
>>76758149
>Why not rape someone
>person is genetically superior
>"nice" of him to then rape
Are you alright, mate?
There's this little thing called empathy.
You don't need to be afraid of hell to not rape someone you sick fuck.
>>76757006
>brainwashed
Taught is a better word. Even if I had no parents then systems of ethics would still emerge due to the long term efficiency of cooperation.
>You can get away with lying on a daily basis. How do you combat that one?
I think lowly of people who lie. Therefore I don't do it myself. I see no reason to do it. Compulsive liars are weak people who don't take responsibility for their actions. It comes from mental instability due to a bad upbringing, whether or not that upbringing involves god.
>Catholicism and protestantism are both heresy, so no.
Then, for the record, what do you believe?
Atheism is fine.
Christianity is evil.
Jews are necessary for good western media.
Muslims are impressively devout but a danger on the world.
Pagans are best bros.
Wiccans are sluts.
>>76758199
You mean as long as you accept it's all in yer head and founded on topsy-tervy thinking and learn to enjoy it then bröther
>>76757940
>I'm not free to do whatever I want. Laws and societal norms restrict me from doing many things.
Laws, maybe. Societal norms? Give me a break. If you lie on your CV, what repercussions does that have? If you lie about not masturbating, what repercussions? Literally none. Also, the argument in the OP implies you won't get caught. What's stopping you then?
>I know I'm accountable for my actions because my actions have consequences.
Not if you don't get caught. Read the OP and try again.
>>76758290
>So because the consequences of truth might be bad, we should all lie?
No? I simply pointed that atheism is fundamentally degenerate.
>>76758149
>all that straw-maning
Just remember that these are your ideas. No evil, degenerate atheists in this thread are suggesting what you are suggesting.
>>76758370
>Are you alright, mate?
Refute the argument.
>There's this little thing called empathy.
Reason supersedes emotion. Does it not?
>You don't need to be afraid of hell to not rape someone you sick fuck.
Animals rape each other all the time. Are they too, sick fucks?
>>76758314
>Literately every single one of your questions
To. Make. People's. Lives. Easier.
My father taught me this concept, HIS father taught him that concept and every perceivable father before HIM taught him that.
Please read all the words chronologically before making a rebuttal.
>>76758401
>Taught is a better word.
I think brainwashed is a better one seeing as you refuse to accept the logical approach.
>I think lowly of people who lie.
That imples you know that they are lying. What if people never find out? For example, lying on your CV. What's stopping you from doing that? If you can get away with it, why not?
>Then, for the record, what do you believe?
The Bible.
>>76751899
Checked.
Can you tell us anything about the evolution of religion in Sweden?
I think now you guys are pretty much faithless, but what did you used to believe before it all went to shit?
>>76758726
>No evil, degenerate atheists in this thread are suggesting what you are suggesting.
Read the OP next time.
>I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism. Morality is impossible without a foundation of transcendental truth. Atheism denies that such a concept is even possible. Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
>>76758782
>Refute the argument.
You built a flimsy strawman.
What is there to refute?
>Reason supersedes emotion. Does it not?
I wouldn't want someone to take a shit on my rug, why would I shit on someone's rug?
>Animals rape each other all the time. Are they too, sick fucks?
No, they are animals. They are incapable of empathy.
>>76758864
>To. Make. People's. Lives. Easier.
Why do you care about making other people's lives easier? It makes no sense if doing so hinders your own prosperity.
>My father taught me this concept, HIS father taught him that concept and every perceivable father before HIM taught him that.
Brainwashed it is then.
>>76758988
>Can you tell us anything about the evolution of religion in Sweden?
One of the most secular countries on the planet. Gone from pagan to christianity to fedorism.
>I think now you guys are pretty much faithless, but what did you used to believe before it all went to shit?
See above.
>>76758599
You have the chance of being caught lying, which is a risk you are taking opposite to the proper function of the resume. There are possible negative repercussions for every action which negatively impacts other people in society, and intelligent people understand actions which impact others positively has the chance of positive repercussions. Society existed before organized religion because society was founded on this understanding. If we help each other, then there is possible gain for ourselves.
Religious morality is slowly being replaced with principles of game theory and an understanding of why society functions. Everything points towards working together for the most efficient work in some fashion if you have the means to work together properly.
>>76759092
>You built a flimsy strawman.
It's a strawman because you said so? Refute it.
>I wouldn't want someone to take a shit on my rug, why would I shit on someone's rug?
Because that person is not you. Why should you care about him?
>No, they are animals. They are incapable of empathy.
And humans aren't animals? But if we're gonna throw reason out the window, why not just abide by emotion completely? Fuck everything that has got anything to do with reason. You wanna believe in science? Sorry, no. The idea of gravity upsets me. I'm upset by the legal system, remove it.
>>76758980
>I think brainwashed is a better one seeing as you refuse to accept the logical approach.
See this guy's post>>76758864 That is the logical approach.
>What if people never find out?
We don't live in a world where that happens.
>The Bible
As do Catholics and Protestants, or so they claim. What makes you different?
You're getting a lot of (You)s today, Sven. Soak it all up.
Since we already have the bible and these moral truths that you hold so dear, what stops us from just adopting these morals and deny Gods existence? Just because we say we don't need God anymore, it makes the morals and laws unusable? We haven't heard anything from God for 2000 years, I think it's time for us to move on, don't you?
>>76758980
Have you read the whole thing though? I read both testaments cover the cover the summer I was 15, King James Version.
There is some seriously fucked up shit in there.
Lot's daughters, ladies and gentlemen. This is how God does it up, after he turned mum into a pillar of salt for looking back.
God turned mum into a pillar of salt so Lot's daughters gave him wine and he fucked them and made babies with them.
And that's how we got started as people mostly.
Well, that's not fucked up at all! That was in the book of Genesis. The very first book. Chapter and Verse in captioned picture. You can't make this shit up.
From there, it got crazier and crazier and crazier. I was a Good Christian but holy shit did I have a lot of questions. A LOT OF QUESTIONS!
The only answers I got was that it's allegory, parable, or all based on faith. The Church and I parted on friendly terms.
Any religion is a social control mechanism, and maybe we need that as a society, but the bible, if you read it cover to cover, is one fucked up pair of books.
>>76755020
Burn the witch.
Burn the heretic.
It's not evil is saving their soul.
>>76759343
>You have the chance of being caught lying, which is a risk you are taking opposite to the proper function of the resume.
Stop trying to avoid the question. Assuming you won't get caught, why not lie?
>. There are possible negative repercussions for every action which negatively impacts other people in society, and intelligent people understand actions which impact others positively has the chance of positive repercussions.
If the outcome supersedes the repercussions, and it's a great chance that you'll avoid getting caught, then the most rational approach is to go through with it.
>Religious morality is slowly being replaced with principles of game theory and an understanding of why society functions. Everything points towards working together for the most efficient work in some fashion if you have the means to work together properly.
Just because this is what's happening it doesn't mean it's the rational approach. Abiding by arbitrary laws that benefit society and not you is not intelligible from an atheistic perspective. Why should I care about what happens to children 100 years from now? Why should I give a shit about the climate they grow up in? What about things like the death sentence? How do you conclude if that's moral or immoral? What about incest? What about bestiality? Necrophilia? All of these are VERY easy to morally rationalize.
>>76759784
>See this guy's post>>76758864 That is the logical approach.
It's not the logical approach if it hinders your prosperity.
>We don't live in a world where that happens.
Still avoiding the question. Also, we do. I've lied plenty of times and never got caught. So stop talking shit.
>or so they claim.
There you go.
>>76759518
>It's a strawman because you said so? Refute it.
There is a giant pink unicorn in your room. REFUTE IT.
>Because that person is not you. Why should you care about him?
Because not being an asshole benefits the society? Like, imagine this. I'm not an asshole to this guy, and than that guy doesn't shit on someone's rug. See. We all benefit from not shitting on people's rugs.
Look, Latvia is extremely non religious and no one has shat on my rug.
>And humans aren't animals?
We are social animals. Shitting on someones rug would make us face consequences. So it is not advisable. Sure, you don't believe in hell so you won't go to hell for wiping your ass on someone's curtains, but you will go to jail.
Actually wait, scratch that.
If I shit on someones rug and wipe my ass on the curtains do I not go to hell if the person I did this to is okay with it?
Or do I go to hell because it is written so in the pink unicorn book?
>>76751899
the biggest degenerates i know were all raised catholic. iyself am atheist, my mother isjewish, my father was catholic and i grew up in a strictly protestant village.
i am a disciplined, well adjusted and resppnsible individual. i despise promiscuity and hedonism and i pursue s puritanical ideal.
i find it offensive when inbred faggots like you declare people like me degenerate just because we're not idiotic enough to believe that the earth is 5000 years old and snakes can talk.
>>76759916
>There is some seriously fucked up shit in there.
And why are they fucked up? Because of social conditioning (i.e. socialization) that you've gone through?
>>76759518
Keep up the good work swedebro.
>>76759871
>Since we already have the bible and these moral truths that you hold so dear, what stops us from just adopting these morals and deny Gods existence?
Because without God's existence all of these "moral truths" are just arbitrary opinions. You need God to have moral universalism.
>>76751899
>the only people actually speaking out against Islam and its tyranny
>cause of the destruction of the west by Islam
You can go fuck yourself, cucktholic.
>>76760325
Because incest is detrimental to human reproduction.
>>76760136
>There is a giant pink unicorn in your room. REFUTE IT.
That's not even comparable to what I was saying.
>Because not being an asshole benefits the society?
Why should you care about society? Let other brainwashed fucks do it while you reap the benefit of not doing so. Also, who is and isn't an "asshole" is subjective.
>Like, imagine this. I'm not an asshole to this guy, and than that guy doesn't shit on someone's rug. See. We all benefit from not shitting on people's rugs.
I lie on my CV, I get the job, no one ever finds out because it was a trivial lie. Everyone benefited. Guess lying is moral then. Good job, Latvia. You just morally justified lying! Woohoo for atheism!
>We are social animals
Oh, so we are animals!
>Shitting on someones rug would make us face consequences.
Only if that person finds out. Assume he doesn't.
>Sure, you don't believe in hell so you won't go to hell for wiping your ass on someone's curtains, but you will go to jail.
Will you go to jail for lying to a stranger on the street?
>>76760399
God's existence and religions are just arbitrary opinions and concepts. Those moral concepts are a whole lot more real to everyone I'm sure than God is.
>>76760497
The likelihood of birth defects is only noticeable increased after several generations of inbreeding. Also, what about birth-control? Abortion? What about condoms? Protection in general? Anal sex? There are ways in which you can avoid pregnancy and still have incestious relationships. See how easy it is to morally justify?
>>76760800
>God's existence and religions are just arbitrary opinions and concepts.
Then there's no reason for you to subscribe to a set of moral rules.
>>76760325
I will ask you again, have you read the old and new testament cover to cover?
You can read it online here: http://www.biblestudytools.com/
>>76759219
Because my actions have consequences. Sure it'd probably be easier to lie, steal, and even cheat my way to the top but these are short-term answers for long-term problems. Lying to someone means I keep myself out of trouble but at the risk of them finding out and having even more problems than I did before, and an action like that is what shapes my personality.
I could steal from someone without ever giving them anything so that I have it and they don't, but then comes the risk of whomever I steal from eventually finding me and taking it back by whatever force the deem necessary. That can also define my personality assuming I even LIVE after a crime like that.
And sure, I could cheat as much as I want and never have to answer to anyone, because I always win, but that, above all else, could not only lead to me one day slipping up and answering to someone who now, physically or metaphorically, holds all the cards, but this also defines my personality.
What it all sums up to is I'd be a horrible person that doesn't care about anyone as long as I get my way, which NEVER works out for anyone in the long run, but this entire life of mine has risks I COULD take everyday and either win or lose horribly. I do not want to take risks every day hoping I come out on top. Instead of telling everyone to go fuck themselves, I'd rather make their lives easier so that if I ever do stumble and fall, I'll always have someone that has my back when that happens. Friends, family, loved ones. All people you WON'T meet being a disgusting tyrant who lives by his own rules.
And I don't need a God to teach me that, because I figured it out with the help of everyone that cares about me because of all the good things I do for them, and, in turn, what can and will do for me.
>>76761102
>I will ask you again, have you read the old and new testament cover to cover?
No.
>>76760977
I actually don't think incest is morally wrong. Tbh I throw the morals of religion into the trash. I'm guided by scientific research and muh feels.
>>76751899
THEISM: False Good, False Evil, False Hope
The Bible is an early science book on reality and morality. Treat it like one.
Black, white? I can't tell; others call it gray.
>>76752284
Just.. Stop bro..
>>76761200
Checked, and check it out sometime.
If you do, you will more than agree that 'The Good Books' contain some majorly fucked up shit.
Peace, and fun thread!
Bless you, or whatever.
Merry Christmas - Is that offensive in Sweden?
>>76759977
That's not a realistic situation given how it is presented. If for some reason you 100% will not get caught for lying, then there is no reason to not lie. A proper system should be and most likely will instantly be applied to correct this mistake unless the mistake is enforced for some illogical reason.
This is a general form of what I stated above specific to the situation involving the resume. Assuming you know the outcome before the act is complete and the chance is not 100%, you are gambling on the idea that you will not get caught. You'd have to break down the example in detail to see if it is logical to go through with the action or not (compare possible gain if successful and possible loss if unsuccessful). Otherwise you are just gambling which is illogical concerning something as important as your career.
I've personally thought about having kids and based on my life at the moment I'm leaning towards not having kids (not dating at the moment, very funny I know). I care about the future of humanity because most other people care about the future of humanity for their children's sake. Through this I gain from showing I care about what other people care about in my actions. I also ideally want to devote my livelihood to advancing humanity in some direct fashion, so that's my personal motivation which overlaps with this. All aspects of morality are covered by what I've stated in this thread. You should act in a way that benefits humanity objectively and what other people see as good subjectively for high efficiency on a personal level in whatever you pursue.
>>76760113
>It's not the logical approach if it hinders your prosperity.
We aren't all megalomaniacs. Most of us just want nice, calm little lives. Actually the majority of all humans who have ever lived have only wanted nice, calm little lives. We, as creatures, don't need perfection, just "good enough". But things get complicated in a world of born out of chaos.
>Still avoiding the question. Also, we do. I've lied plenty of times and never got caught. So stop talking shit.
The question is horseshit.
>>76756735
>it doesn't make it correct.
Correct enough, with self-correcting mechanisms in place.
>>76760399
It's too bad that faith isn't as easy as pointing at a shrine and saying "there he is, praise him!" like the old days.
Also I've been gone for like an hour and cannot believe your dedication to keeping this atheism General going. Really though this is the same thread we've had ten thousand times, no different than when it was spammed with the Neverending Story girl as the OP pic over and over. If faith gets you to be a 'good' person, whether by society's vague definitions or your own, great, I'm happy you have that avenue towards being a good person. I disagree that it's the only foundation to morality though, your staunch denial of anyone who says otherwise is on par with your average tumblr post.
As a personal example, I find the sexually promiscuous culture young people are exposed to repulsive, not because it's a hell-worthy sin offending the Allmighty, but because it devalues what is otherwise an intimate and exclusive bond between two people, turning it into a casual encounter. By your logic, I as a person without faith should be absolutely fine with free-fucking, but my contention is that your logic is not how humans operate, not all of them.
>>76761378
Moral relativism is the plague of this century. Fuck off kike.
>>76760761
Scratch the entire conversation we had.
>it was a trivial lie
Okay. Let's say come visit your mother for dinner.
She's been cooking all day in anticipation of you coming over.
You take a bite and it tastes like shit.
Your mom asks you - "How is it, dear?". Do you tell her it tastes like shit?
I mean, lying is a sin and all.
You should just tell your mom how you really feel about the meatballs she spent the entire afternoon making for you, just like Jesus would have wanted.
>>76761110
>Because my actions have consequences.
Not consequences that are necessarily bad for you. Lying on a CV for example. If your friend wants to hang out, but you don't, and you make up a lie to turn him down (like saying you got something else planned). He will probably never find out, and you benefited from this lie. So, was the lying immoral?
>Sure it'd probably be easier to lie, steal, and even cheat my way to the top but these are short-term answers for long-term problems.
What kind of problems? The jews are doing it like this, because they understand what I'm talking about. They understood that there is no good or evil. There is just your own prosperity.
>Lying to someone means I keep myself out of trouble but at the risk of them finding out and having even more problems than I did before, and an action like that is what shapes my personality.
Depends on the lie. Some lies don't have any repercussions whatsoever. Also, like I said before, if the outcome is greater than the repercussion, and the odds of getting caught are lower than the odds of getting away, then the most rational approach is to go through with it. This argument applies to the rest of your examples.
>What it all sums up to is I'd be a horrible person that doesn't care about anyone as long as I get my way
Again, what's horrible and not boils down to opinion. Besides, why should you care? We live in the 21st century. If you get ostracized in one city, just move to another. If that doesn't do it, move to another country.
>And I don't need a God to teach me that, because I figured it out with the help of everyone that cares about me because of all the good things I do for them, and, in turn, what can and will do for me.
You need an absolute moral authority (i.e. God) to say what IS and ISN'T wrong. Otherwise it just boils down to opinion (i.e. arbitrary).
>>76761274
>I actually don't think incest is morally wrong
You're a prime example of why atheism leads to degeneracy. Thank you for confirming my point in the OP.
>>76761787
Of course I would retard, otherwise she might think they're good and keep making them that way. Do you enjoy eating shit?
>>76761498
>Checked, and check it out sometime.
In the process of doing just that.
>Merry Christmas - Is that offensive in Sweden?
Heh. Is pic-related offensive in Turkey?
>>76761569
>If for some reason you 100% will not get caught for lying, then there is no reason to not lie.
Good job on confirming the point I was making in the OP.
>>76761569
Lies use up your memory, which could be used for better things. What a tangled web and all that.
Samuel Clements once said: 'If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything'.
Twain was based.
>>76761774
No, it's moral absoluteism; we don't know what it is yet.
>>76761911
Don't know about religiousfags, but not not breaking my moms heart means more to me than eating a less than delicious meatball.
>>76761728
>Correct enough, with self-correcting mechanisms in place.
Guess you agree with all that SJW bullshit then. What are you doing on /pol/? The majority of people think that Islam is a religion of peace, I guess they must be correct.
>Also I've been gone for like an hour and cannot believe your dedication to keeping this atheism General going. Really though this is the same thread we've had ten thousand times, no different than when it was spammed with the Neverending Story girl as the OP pic over and over.
I want to red-pill as many people as I can.
>>76762120
Less than delicious and shit are different things. Also you don't have to tell her "YO DIS FUD IS BAD WHORE". You can just state what you dislike about it like a normal human being, also you can state that even though the food didn't turn out the best you still appreciate it. ETC. Do I have to teach you how to be a normal human being?
>>76761787
>Do you tell her it tastes like shit?
Yes, probably.
>I mean, lying is a sin and all.
Yes, and lying is degenerate.
>You should just tell your mom how you really feel about the meatballs she spent the entire afternoon making for you, just like Jesus would have wanted.
Yes, you should.
>>76751899
Fuck off Achmed, take your sandnigger religions and shove it up your ass.
>>76762120
I don't know about your mom, but my mom would appreciate me telling the truth, and probably feel joy knowing that I wasn't lying to her. She would feel that she could trust me.
Also, lol at your mom's heart breaking because you didn't like her meatballs.
>>76762475
>Sandnigger religion
Good one. Jesus was white, and so was Adam.
>>76762379
>"How is it, dear?"
>I appreciate it.
Like what type of answer is that?
Why go through all that when you can just tell her it's tasty?
>>76762404
So you are willing to hurt the ones closest to you because Jesus?
>>76762063
good job ignoring the rest of my post where I explain the system where this would take place would be corrected very quickly after the system is implemented.
You can create impossible situations to prove anything. What if God told you to murder a random person on the street, you would definitely go to hell if you didn't go through with it, and God made sure you understood that this was not a test? For the example it is definitely the Christian God and it is definitely not a test in any way. Is it logical to murder a random person on a street in this situation?
to save you the trouble it would be logical if you are a practicing Christian. the Christian version of God is infallible so whatever God states has to be true.
>>76762727
>Like what type of answer is that?
He appreciate that she took the time to cook for her. Are you autistic?
>Why go through all that when you can just tell her it's tasty?
Confirming my point in the OP. You're the 3rd person so far.
>So you are willing to hurt the ones closest to you because Jesus?
Like I said, I don't think it will hurt her, quite the opposite actually. And even if it would, then yes, because lying is immoral.
What's your end-game, Sven?
>>76762063
>Good job on confirming the point I was making in the OP.
Are you actually trying to say you wouldn't lie every now and again of you had 0% chance of ever getting caught? Don't kid yourself, Sven. I know you're trying to make it seem as if you're on some perfect moral high ground for believing in God, but wow. You are full of shit
>inb4 "Yeah, lying is degenerate" XD
>>76762548
We just have different values I guess.
I value this life more than you do, so I try to be less of a jerk in it.
For me the people I care about come first.
If you look at it from a believers standpoint, i'd rather burn in hell for eternity than see those closest to me hurting in any way.
>>76761796
>He will probably never find out, and you benefited from this lie. So, was the lying immoral?
Well first off, I try to hang out with my friends as much as possible, and if can't, then I tell them why and they'll understand, because those are the people I want to hang out with and have as best friends and I'd rather, you know, NOT lie. Doesn't matter if it's immoral or not, it's just being a shitty person if you do.
>The jews are doing it like this
I don't care what the collective Jews are doing. I care what I'm doing. I care what the people in my life are doing. News like this doesn't really concern me,
>then the most rational approach is to go through with it.
Except it's not rational. It's stupid. It's a risk I don't want and won't take. Doesn't matter if it's "easier" it's a chance I won't take for myself and others.
>If you get ostracized in one city, just move to another.
Nah I like the city I live in. All the more reason to not take chances and act like an ass.
>You need an absolute moral authority to say what IS and ISN'T wrong.
By that logic, wouldn't my parents, who loved me and cared for me and the friends who also love and care for me be all the "absolute moral authority" I need? You're grasping at straws at this point, buddy.
>>76762858
>good job ignoring the rest of my post
The rest of your post is irrelevant since you said lying is perfectly fine if you can get away with it. You proved my point in the OP.
> What if God told you to murder a random person on the street, you would definitely go to hell if you didn't go through with it, and God made sure you understood that this was not a test?
Then I would go through with it. God is the absolute moral authority. His word is law. He is objective.
>Is it logical to murder a random person on a street in this situation?
Yes.
>the Christian version of God is infallible so whatever God states has to be true.
Correct
>>76751899
"yet they fail to understand something so simple"
Like rules of evidence for believing in a supreme being? Oh wait...
>>76763062
Deter people from atheism.
>>76762288
>Guess you agree with all that SJW bullshit then
Sure, okay then.
I mean are you really so rigid in your view of society that it cannot allow in the view that the majority of people (when not being strongly influenced) will trend towards agreeing upon basic rules in regards to stuff like "don't kill anyone" or "don't take my shit, I won't take your shit either"?
I don't need to think I'm going to hell for murder to not consider justifying it to myself, I simply don't want to end another life except to protect my own. You can tell me I'm wrong in my logic, my interpretation, my supposed morality, whatever you want, but at that point you're just trying to tear down someone's desire to be good in order to squeeze in your own.
>>76763082
>Are you actually trying to say you wouldn't lie every now and again of you had 0% chance of ever getting caught?
Oh I've lied plenty of times. The difference is, I will try my hardest not to, and I will feel immense regret if I do tell the lie.
>>76763204
Why?
If god is real, why did he pick the kikes for his people?
>>76755431
Why do you think is suffering bad?
>>76763407
Do you like to suffer?
There is no more evidence for or against god than there is evidence that the the world has existed for exactly one week.
>>76763304
>he majority of people ... will trend towards agreeing upon basic rules in regards to stuff like "don't kill anyone" or "don't take my shit, I won't take your shit either"?
O really? I present to you
a) abortion
b) welfare.
QED. Go skulk in a corner now.
>>76763140
>Well first off, I try to hang out with my friends as much as possible, and if can't, then I tell them why and they'll understand, because those are the people I want to hang out with and have as best friends and I'd rather, you know, NOT lie. Doesn't matter if it's immoral or not, it's just being a shitty person if you do.
It was just an example. I'm sure latvia here >>76763102 would lie to his friends in order to not hurt their feelings, consequently proving my point.
>I don't care what the collective Jews are doing. I care what I'm doing.
You're being irrational, the jews are not.
>Except it's not rational. It's stupid. It's a risk I don't want and won't take. Doesn't matter if it's "easier" it's a chance I won't take for myself and others.
Like I said. The probability of getting caught is lower than succeeding, and the outcome is far greater than the repercussions. The rational approach is to go through with it. There's no arguing this.
>Nah I like the city I live in. All the more reason to not take chances and act like an ass.
See previous response.
>By that logic, wouldn't my parents, who loved me and cared for me and the friends who also love and care for me be all the "absolute moral authority" I need? You're grasping at straws at this point, buddy.
Lol what? Your parents are an absolute moral authority? You really should up on moral relativism, absolutism and universalism before you jump into these discussions.
>>76760761
>Why should you care about society? Let other brainwashed fucks do it while you reap the benefit of not doing so.
what are the benefits of not caring about society?
>Also, who is and isn't an "asshole" is subjective.
provide an alternative view on "shitting on someone else's rug just for the hell of it" so it's not seen as asshole behavior
>I lie on my CV, I get the job, no one ever finds out because it was a trivial lie.
so you admit that they let the lie pass because they didn't care about it and didn't affect anything the society value, might as well not have said anything at all
except if you do get caught, you will be tagged as someone who spouts false info and will be less trusted and more likely to be pinned with problems that come up that involves violation of trust
you just risked job security for a trivial lie
>Only if that person finds out. Assume he doesn't.
so this cartoonishly immoral lifestyle that you like to prop up is only possible in a fairytale world where there is zero risk of being caught
>Will you go to jail for lying to a stranger on the street?
one of those trivial lies that no one cares about? no?
>>76763331
Because it's degenerate.
>>76751899
theres no reason to not be amoral. prove me wrong
>>76763689
Why?
>>76761859
I think religion is way more degenerate. You welcome the weakest of society and make them your family. For 2000 years the church has become the bastion of degeneracy and without God talking to you, you've had to justify your degenerate practices. In my eyes religions are morally degenerate more than in their actions.
>>76751899
I just wish Christianity was stronger and cooler. It really is the cuck religion.
>>76763370
See >>76762612
The "jews" are not God's chosen people.
>>76756999
>No. Because if I make people suffer I go to hell.
Incorrect.
Gym teachers who make their pupils fall over from exertion do not go to hell for making their students suffer.
Sin sends you to hell.
Suffering is not sin.
Theres no reason to not be "degenerate"either. proeve me wrong retardr nigger fak
>>76763760
Read the OP.
>>76751899
>Swede
>Christcuck
Like poetry.
>>76763314
>I will try my hardest not to, and I will feel immense regret if I do tell the lie
It seems you think someone without religious faith is incapable of feeling this same feeling, like it's the entire crux of your thread, that logically there's no reason a faithless person should? It's a logical argument being applied to an illogical species, we're not designed as perfect beings.
>>76763645
I was thinking more in terms of basic robbery and murder where law-abiding people don't run around gunning one another down, but you raise a solid point that some things are just subject of endless debate from at least some people.
>>76751899
Many people think that faith and reason are opposites; that belief in God and tough-minded logical reasoning are like oil and water.
They are wrong. Belief in God is far more rational than atheism.
Logic can show that there is a God.
If you look at the universe with common sense and an open mind, you’ll find that it’s full of God’s fingerprints.
A good place to start is with an argument by Thomas Aquinas, the great 13th century philosopher and theologian.
The argument starts with the not very startling observation that things move.
But nothing moves for no reason.
Something must cause that movement.
And whatever caused that, must be caused by something else, and so on.
But this causal chain cannot go backwards forever. It must have a beginning.
There must be an Unmoved Mover to begin all the motion in the universe: a first domino to start the whole chain moving, since mere matter never moves itself.
General Theory of Relativity says that all time is relative to matter and since all matter began 13.7 billion years ago, so did all time.
So there’s no time before the Big Bang.
And even if there is time before the Big Bang, even if there is a multi-verse, that is, many universes with many Big Bangs, as String Theory says is mathematically possible, that too must have a beginning.
An absolute beginning is what most people mean by God.
>>76763817
>Adam
fundamentalists are beyond reason, have a nice night
>>76763826
>Suffering is not sin.
So if i break your leg I'm not a sinner?
Imagine me as a tough gym teacher, learn to run with one leg, it will make you stronger.
Like, let me steal all of your worldly possessions, imagine I'm making life hardmode for you to make you stronger. Sort of like a thieving gym teacher.
Look, the whole point of Jesus is that he suffered for us. He died for our sins.
If suffering means nothing it was all for nothing.
>>76763679
>what are the benefits of not caring about society?
You don't sacrifice your own prosperity for the sake of others'
>provide an alternative view on "shitting on someone else's rug just for the hell of it" so it's not seen as asshole behavior
By shitting on his rug I consequently force him to buy a new one, thus making the rug merchant earn more money. It's bad for one person, good for the other.
>except if you do get caught, you will be tagged as someone who spouts false info and will be less trusted and more likely to be pinned with problems that come up that involves violation of trust
you just risked job security for a trivial lie
I don't know what world you live in, but in Sweden they don't go to that much trouble if you lie on your CV. If they found out while you have the job, they won't care (if it was a trivial lie), if they find out before you get the job, they will just not give you the job, or ignore it. It's not like they will tell the whole world wide that you lied on your CV. Get real.
>so this cartoonishly immoral lifestyle that you like to prop up is only possible in a fairytale world where there is zero risk of being caught
I will say it again. If the probability of getting caught is lower than not, and the outcome is greater than the repercussions, then the most rational option is to go through with it.
>one of those trivial lies that no one cares about? no?
Yes
>>76764054
>Something must cause that movement.
>And whatever caused that, must be caused by something else, and so on.
>But this causal chain cannot go backwards forever. It must have a beginning.
Why? Theres no proof that there's a beginning for anything or that there needs to be a begenning for something
>>76763689
Atheism is correct. It doesn't have over 2000 years of moral development like Judaism and Christianity. Atheism needs to take the Bible as its first textbook on morality.
>>76763657
>It was just an example.
A shitty example that I proved you wrong on.
>You're being irrational, the jews are not.
If you say so.
>The rational approach is to go through with it. There's no arguing this.
No it isn't. I already explained to you in that paragraph of mine why taking risks can have repercussions. Doesn't matter how low the chance is, if you're caught, you're caught and you have to live with that for the rest of your life. Even a liar like you will be found out one day, whether you think so or not. Doesn't matter to me. You'll get what's coming to you then and your God won't be there to help you.
>See previous response.
Suck my previous dick.
>You really should up on moral relativism, absolutism and universalism before you jump into these discussions.
I'm good. I'm pretty sure I proved my point a long time ago, you're the one beating a dead horse.
>>76764019
>It seems you think someone without religious faith is incapable of feeling this same feeling
This mindset doesn't make sense from an atheistic perspective. That's the point I've been making from the very start. Lying isn't "immoral" from an atheistic perspective, nothing is. Everything is mere action. Lying is like drinking a glass of water; just an action.
>>76764054
>state a fallacy
>claim it proves god
here is an idea: there is no beginning
BAM
I KILLED GOD
>>76764258
Ok...
Sure....
A modern objection to this argument is that some movements things in quantum mechanics -- radioactive decay, for example -- have no discernible cause, but hang on a second.
Just because scientists don’t see a cause, doesn’t mean there isn’t one.
It just means science hasn’t found it yet.
Maybe some day they will. But then there will have to be a new cause to explain that one.
And so on and so on.
But science will never find the first cause.
That’s no knock on science. It simply means that a first cause lies outside the realm of science.
The conclusion that God exists doesn’t require faith. Atheism requires faith.
It takes faith to believe in everything coming from nothing.
It takes only reason to believe in everything coming from God
>>76764269
>Atheism is correct
Then rape isn't "wrong". Murder isn't "wrong". Pedophilia isn't "wrong". Enjoy your degenerate new world where everything can be moral given you do a bit of mental gymnastics.
>>76751899
>Logically then there is no reason for an individual to respect the concept of collective morality.
Respecting collective morality is required from the individuals in a community for it to be a harmonious community. Therefore it is logical for me to respect collective morality, as I want to live in a harmonious community that is a good place for me to exist in.
Wow, that was so hard. Such arduous logic.
>>76764390
>This mindset doesn't make sense from an atheistic perspective
Which is why you continue to be wrong about people who don't share your faith, and why you'll make this thread again later.
>>76764054
Even if there was a God who created the universe, that doesn't mean any religion on earth knows that God personally. All religions could just aswell be wrong. If there was such a God, he sure as fuck doesn't present himself to us. And fuck anyone who said they saw angels, heard God's voice or visited heaven in their sleep. That's about as meaningful as a druggie telling what he experienced on his trip.
>>76755023
Stirner is for 14 year olds
>>76764520
Would you like to get raped, murdered or sexually abused when you were a kid?
There are no mental gymnastics associated with not wanting to get raped and therefore not raping.
>>76764502
>But science will never find the first cause.
No proof. It could.
BAM
GOD
DEAD
>>76764298
>A shitty example that I proved you wrong on.
No, because latvia proved me right.
>If you say so.
Logic says so. See OP.
>No it isn't
Sigh, yes it is. Probability of getting caught vs not + outcome vs repercussions.
>Suck my previous dick.
Emotional response. You're drifting from reason. Might need to put on another fedora, or play with your samurai sword.
>I'm good. I'm pretty sure I proved my point a long time ago, you're the one beating a dead horse.
Apparently you're not, since you called your parents an absolute moral authority.
>>76763547
Read Lewis' Problem of Pain or Mishima's Sun and Steel
>>76764544
>Respecting collective morality is required from the individuals in a community for it to be a harmonious community.
Are you new to the thread? What about trivial lies? What if you can get away with murder or anything else which is deemed immoral?
>>76752171
Someone is mad Muhammad bin Jihad is shagging his wife.
>>76764520
A rock isn't soft because you believe it is. A rock won't leave someone alive if you keep hitting someone on the head if you think the rock is soft and fluffy.
>>76764643
Age is a social constarct
>>76764674
>>76764674
>Would you like to get raped, murdered or sexually abused when you were a kid?
no, but i would like to commit those acts to others hehehehe :^)
>>76764502
just because you assume there's a cause doesn't mean there is a cause
>>76764520
>Enjoy your degenerate new world where everything can be moral given you do a bit of mental gymnastics.
Well, Christians have raped, killed, and been involved in paedophilia. Their belief in God didn't stop them....And last time I checked, religion itself can be utilized to justify immoral actions. (Inquisition, terrorist attacks). What's your point, Sven?
>>76764674
>Would you like to get raped, murdered or sexually abused when you were a kid?
No. How is that relevant though? Why should I care about someone else in an atheistic world view? Say you're competing with another guy for 1 million dollar, and there's a button which you can press that kills him and no one finds out, why shouldn't you press it? You get 1 million dollar, and no one finds out.
>>76764054
I'd like to point out that arguments for God's existence aren't limited to Thomas' (though I'm Catholic and think his are the best). There's also Anselm, the Kalam argument, and others
>>76764712
Look, if you want to be a massive brick wall that doesn't want to change the way he looks at things based on factual information then that's fine.
That doesn't mean I can't be a brick wall, too.
By all means, please dump as many fedoras as you see fit until you need to copy more from your Google tab. I've already made my point, not my problem if you want to be an extremist about it.
>>76764520
Just as God in the bible changes his mind on when something is moral and when it isn't, so can we. So even God is a moral relativist, because he changes his mind from time to time.
>>76753237
Because empathy is a human emotion that's not controlled by our thoughts. You can recognize it and try to limit it in your decision making but you can't eliminate it. If you had half a brain you'd know this but since you're retarded you don't.
>>76764927
>Well, Christians have raped, killed, and been involved in paedophilia. Their belief in God didn't stop them.
No, but I can guarantee you that it did slow them down. Look at Joseph Stalin. Commie got nearly 200 million killed because of moral relativism.
>What's your point, Sven?
That atheists are more likely to be degenerate than christians.
>>76764520
Murder, rape and pedophilia are wrong because society decided so.
>>76765062
>I've already made my point, not my problem if you want to be an extremist about it.
Then why do you keep replying if I'm just a brick wall?
>>76765165
>That atheists are more likely to be degenerate than christians.
Based on what?
>>76765083
>Just as God in the bible changes his mind on when something is moral and when it isn't, so can we
Except he doesn't.
>So even God is a moral relativist, because he changes his mind from time to time.
No. God's word is everlasting.
>>76764698
Science inherently can't discover a first cause. Its not an empirical claim, its prior to empirical claims.
>>76751899
If you believe that Moses got his tablets from literally god then don't read more of this post, otherwise go on. The morals presented in the bible didn't just appear put of nowhere, people lived by them for a long time before it got written down formally. Therefore Christianity just added a little frosting to the already existing traditions.
>inb4 fedora
there is a difference between atheism and anti-theism
>>76765161
>Because empathy is a human emotion that's not controlled by our thoughts.
Acting on it is, and reason supersedes emotion.
>You can recognize it and try to limit it in your decision making but you can't eliminate it.
Sure you can. I've done so myself.
>>76753237
Also no one but a nigger thinks like that. People don't rape and steal because they know it's a horrible thing. Fucking hell you really are a cuck
>>76765248
To see how many (You)s I can get out of you.
And there be plenty (You)s goin' 'round today.
>look at me, ma, I posted it again!
>>76765165
>No, but I can guarantee you that it did slow them
NO
PROOFS
you're pulling all of this out of your FEELS
you want objective GOOD and EVIL
but there is NONE
>>76764932
You are trying to push some weird perverted worldview that isn't there onto atheism.
Face it dude, you are in the wrong here.
>Say you're competing with another guy for 1 million dollar, and there's a button which you can press that kills him and no one finds out, why shouldn't you press it?
I wouldn't press it because I wouldn't be able to live with the guilt of extinguishing the only chance at life that guy had.
There is no heaven or hell, this is all there is.
>>76765187
>Murder, rape and pedophilia are wrong because society decided so.
What if society thinks something different in the future? What if another society doesn't share these views? Many don't. What about older cultures? Their opinions on the matter are irrelevant? Also, nice argumentum ad populum. Just because the majority of people think something is true it doesn't make it so. Atheism and moral universalism are incompatible.
>>76765271
Master-slave morality.
>>76765165
Why shouldn't a person be "degenerate"?
>>76765307
In the old testament God tells his followers to kill people. Then he comes up with tablets that say don't kill people. That doesn't sound everlasting to be. God is a moral relativist.
>You don't sacrifice your own prosperity for the sake of others
can you provide a specific scenario?
>By shitting on his rug I consequently force him to buy a new one, thus making the rug merchant earn more money. It's bad for one person, good for the other.
if you shit on that merchant's rug, what would he think of that behavior?
>(snip) Get real.
looks like the outcome is greater than the repercussion(which happens to be nil apparently)
>and the outcome is greater than the repercussions
so what is the outcome to repercussion ratio on shitting on someone else's rug just for the hell of it?
>>76765165
>No, but I can guarantee you that it did slow them down
You're trying to carry on a logical argument by using your own assumptions. You have nothing to support that religion "slowed them down" except your hope that it did.
>>76751899
I'm an atheist myself, and that is absolutely true.
>>76765370
>People don't rape and steal because they know it's a horrible thing.
Smells like brainwashing to me. What's horrible and not is subjective. If raping and stealing is beneficial, and you're likely to get away with it, then it's rational to go through with it. Such is life within the realm of atheism.
>Fucking hell you really are a cuck
Said the guy who subscribe to arbitrary rules just for the hell of it.
>>76765431
>you want objective GOOD and EVIL
>but there is NONE
Thanks for confirming the point I was making in the OP. You are number 4.
>>76764520
Non-atheism is incorrect, like people who believe the Earth is flat are.
Until atheist-ology catches up you should watch EWTN, go to catholic churches and listen to the pope and think about what they say.
>>76765450
>You are trying to push some weird perverted worldview that isn't there onto atheism.
I am trying to push logic onto irrational atheists.
>I wouldn't press it because I wouldn't be able to live with the guilt of extinguishing the only chance at life that guy had.
Irrational. See this in the OP
>I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism.
>There is no heaven or hell, this is all there is.
Then nothing is immoral.
>>76765525
I was referring more to the list of statistics you clearly have on hand to back up your hypothesis but okay...
>>76763875
You're entire argument is a strawman. You have really just been arguing with yourself this whole time. You assume all atheists and agnostics adhere to some doctrine of nihilistic hyper-rationality. Atheism is not a belief system but you treat it like one because it makes it easier for you to paint as a great terror. Yes, many degenerates would identify as atheist or non-believers. There is correlation there but not causation. The cause is that people are stupid. Just like the Earth is round and the sky is blue.
Get a grip, dude. Take a look at the shit you've posted. You're fuckin out there.
>>76765547
In an atheistic world view it doesn't matter. He could be a degenerate if he wants to. Actually, degenerate behaviour like hedonism and gluttony is good from an atheistic perspective.
>>76763161
I never said lying is perfectly fine, I said that it is logical for the person acting in self interest to lie. There's a big difference between what benefits society and what is logical for an individual, and society's role is to make sure things that benefit everyone are heavily encouraged over personal motivation.
I didn't properly define the scenario since I was hasty in posting, so my argument in response to how it should be defined is basically not applicable to the scenario I presented.
I've only been arguing moral arguments regarding religion and lack of religion because it is the point of this thread. My deconversion was honestly based on things regarding the structure and development of Christianity despite your idea about how all atheists deconverted for moral reasons (had to deal with Catholic guilt regarding sins that aren't against US law for around a year after deconverting). Going into that will take a rather long time, so I suppose that's for another thread.
>>76765556
>In the old testament God tells his followers to kill people. Then he comes up with tablets that say don't kill people.
There's a difference between murder and kill. He never changed his mind or law. Try again.
>>76765982
>Then nothing is immoral.
What is morality?
>>76765709
It's rational because harming other and taking their shit is objectively bad. No one needs a God to tellthem that and if do then you're degenerate one.
Also
>brainwashing
Look at your own belief system man.
>>76765655
Do you have anything to support that christians killed, raped and were involved in pedophilia? Can you prove that these people were in fact christian? No, you can't. If you pull the proof card on me, expect me to use it back at you.
>>76765982
WTF? That means murder and accidental death is even more immoral!
>>76765470
I'm not using ad populum, I'm telling you there is no objective 'wrong'.
There for 'wrong' is purely dependent on society.
Homosexuality.
Pedophilia.
Cannibalism.
Zoophilia.
etc
I am outright telling you that all our 'morals' and ideas of right and wrong are only as relevant is their ability to withstand the test of time.
Guess what, killing has been in the 'wrong' book for a very long time.
>>76766118
>There's a difference between murder and kill
>>76765599
>can you provide a specific scenario?
I've done it plenty of times. One example is the button that kills + the 1 million dollars.
>if you shit on that merchant's rug, what would he think of that behavior?
By shitting on the merchant's rug I make his business worse and make it better for another rug merchant. Good for one person, bad for another.
>so what is the outcome to repercussion ratio on shitting on someone else's rug just for the hell of it?
Fuck if I know.
>>76751899
ITT: Babby's first christcuckout
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthyphro_dilemma
>>76764520
> falling for the meme that says morals come from religion
>>76766051
You don't really need statistics. You really just need common sense. Does the legal system work? Yes, no? Do norms work? Yes, no? Why? Because of potential repercussions, yes? There's no hiding from God, and sinning will have consequences. Biblical law follow the same principle as the legal system. If you don't follow the rules, you will be punished. The legal system works, otherwise we wouldn't have it. I'm sure you can figure out the rest.
>>76762120
>muh moral highground
why do atheists always do this? they put down piousness to inflate their own relative morality claiming moral superiority.
degenerate
>>76766055
>You assume all atheists and agnostics adhere to some doctrine of nihilistic hyper-rationality.
Read the OP.
>
I'm not saying that all atheists are amoral, but that has more to do with the intellectual cowardice, hypocrisy and inconsistent logic of atheists than it does with the moral strength of atheism.
>Atheism is not a belief system but you treat it like one because it makes it easier for you to paint as a great terror
Being an atheist will have an effect on other aspects of your life, just as theism will. Don't be an idiot.
>>76766118
No there's not. This is the part where you start to sound irrational. You can try to twist the meaning of kill, but if you're saying this isn't murder then you are sick.
>Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey. Samuel 15:3
>>76763102
>hurt is objectively immoral/bad
you probably wouldn't tell your boy his girlfriend is cheating on him either huh? so as to not hurt his wittle feewings.. you're far more destructive with this attitude.
>The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
>>76766113
>I never said lying is perfectly fine
You said there wasn't a reason not to lie if you could get away with it, consequently proving my point in the OP.
>>76766615
>You don't really need statistics. You really just need common sense.
80% of America is Hispanic, don't try to challenge me on that though, it's just common sense.
>>76766193
>What is morality?
Right and wrong.
>>76766246
>It's rational because harming other and taking their shit is objectively bad.
Says who?
>>76766251
>Do you have anything to support that Christians killed, raped and were involved in paedophilia?
Millions of people are murdered and raped every single day. Do you honestly think that EVERY single criminal involved was an atheist? What a stupid leap of faith. In the U.S, hundreds are victims of crime from people who are Christian. I don't need evidence and to pull up criminal records to prove my point at all. Your assumption that Christians haven't raped, killed, or been involved in paedophilia at some point would require MUCH more evidence. The burden is on you.
However, your assumption that religion "slowed down" the criminals is pathetic. Even if it did, guess what? They still committed the crime. So much for religion and moral superiority. Wew!
Can I ask you a question, swedebro?
God has a plan for everyone.
God is infallible.
You got sick.
You prayed.
You got better.
Did god change his mind because of your prayer meaning his plan was flawed? Or was you getting better part of his plan making your worship of him completely pointless?
>>76766296
>There for 'wrong' is purely dependent on society.
Which makes it arbitrary, and nonsensical. Why should a person abide by arbitrary rules if he can get away with not to?
>>76766615
>You don't really need statistics. You really just need common sense.
What if I say
>I don't need god, I need is common sense.
>>76766527
Moral universalism comes from theism. It's the only system that can support it.
>>76764502
So you just assume it's God because you don't know what it is. Great proof.
Also atheism is not believing everything came from nothing, it's just not believing in God.
>>76766771
>No there's not.
Yes, there is. Get a dictionary, you illiterate mongol.
>>76766889
I explained how it's common sense later in the post.
>>76751899
I agree with this still, but maybe try changing the text.
There's something aesthetically offensive about the *exact* same thread being posted multiple times if it's not a general.
>>76766421
>By shitting on the merchant's rug I make his business worse and make it better for another rug merchant. Good for one person, bad for another.
you didn't answer the question, what would the merchant think of the behavior? and if you did it to the other merchant as well, what would he think of it?
>>76766417
Take off your beer goggles.
>>76751899
>in-before muh slippery slope
oh wow you asid it yourself i guess that somehow makes it not a slippery slope right?
>>76766943
>Millions of people are murdered and raped every single day. Do you honestly think that EVERY single criminal involved was an atheist?
Not proof. Prove that they were christian. Good luck with that though. You played the proof card, now deal with the repercussions, heathen.
>I don't need evidence and to pull up criminal records to prove my point at all.
"I don't need evidence for my claim, but you do christcuck! Muhaha!"
>>76766983
>Did god change his mind because of your prayer meaning his plan was flawed? Or was you getting better part of his plan making your worship of him completely pointless?
Maybe the sickness taught me a lesson I needed to learn. It was necessary for me to grow as a person.
>>76751899
atheism is edgy
the way you think sven, is edgy
its all edgy and stupid
apatheism = not ruining your life worrying about nothing that means nothing and instead focusing on what matters
>>76767227
Yeah, well your common sense needs a citation otherwise you're just spouting bullshit.
Not everything is certain, as I'm sure you're well aware.
>>76767263
I've only made this thread like 3 times over the course of 6 months.
>>76767284
Clinging to the side of a bottomless and topless pit is a problem - you're going to spend eternity there or else you're eventually going to tumble on down. The suggestion is that you not be in the pit in the first place.
>>76767271
>what would the merchant think of the behavior?
Why should I care?
>and if you did it to the other merchant as well, what would he think of it?
Again, why should I care?
>>76767406
>God works in mysterious ways
That's not an argument.
>>76767461
>Common sense needs a citation
Then it wouldn't be common sense anymore, would it?
