Why don't atheists reject values derived from religion?

You know...I know where you're coming from. But everything we do as humans can be understood as attempts to dominate. Government is used to dominate in a similar way religion has in the past. I believe that we need to...get pass religion's transgressions as though they were...unique. I just finished studying the "honorable" US military and found the amount of atrocities quite prodigious. And before I made a list on this forum of miltary massacres and how many lives they've taken since recorded time. The number is monumental. But we still allow the military to exist.

Yes Saquist our militaristic society is troublesome and as Americans progress(I hope) we will learn to use our force as a last resort, or as a necessity to save lives and not destroy them! [/B

]Islam is a very benign religion it teaches peace, love and law.
Christianity we all know teaches Love of your neighbors. It was derived from Judaism.

If you look at the native Americans who also had religion they were mostly peaceful and interacted well with each other. But it's more than likely that was because the amount of space in the Western World and so few people. Look at Africa and it's just the opposite. They were war like and aggressive religion or not Buddhism is benign, Confucius is benign yet the conflicts persisted with their northern neighbors.

clearly religion isn't blameless. Whether you see it as merely a tool in the wrong hands or mind set of flaws it bears responsibility but that is a case by case assessment.

Religion no matter its purported message has been and still is divisive and until humans can reason better as a whole I don't see that changing anytime soon!
Absolutely.




I like the idea to. It makes sense but it hasn't been well applied in history.
What socialism needs is a series of checks and balances just like the US system. Then I believe it could work. Could you imagine what a socialist/capitalist society would be like with out the oppressive qualities?

I think China might be working it's way to that end.


I am very excited and hopeful about China, I have been watching their progress for a few years. With more than a billion people China would certainly be a beacon of hope if they end up with a successful and fair economiic system.
 
Last edited:
Saquist:

Above, you accused Dywyddyr of lying.

It is not clear what you believe he lied about.

He has requested that you provide evidence of his lies or, failing that, an apology for your accusation.

Please post the evidence of Dywyddyr's lie(s) in your next post to this thread, or withdraw the accusation. Be careful to specify what the lie(s) were, and show how they are demonstrated by Dywyddyr's posts (providing links as appropriate).

Thankyou.
 
But animals or people don't always value the lives of others...

Neither do religious people.

The Moral Argument… a Preview

Dr. Victor Stenger argues effectively that the human moral sense is common to atheists and theists and is as we would expect it to be if it resulted from natural causes, the advantages of cooperation, and social evolution, i.e., it is as we would expect it to be if God had nothing to do with it. If God existed, we would expect theists to be more moral than atheists. There is no evidence for the greater morality of theists. To quote Dr. Stenger, “The very fact that humans have a common moral conscience can be taken as evidence against the existence of God.”

That's true.

My morality is superior to that of any god.

I don't rape, because it is wrong morally and ethically.

Contrast that with Yahweh and Jesus who say raping a woman is perfectly okay (and might even be fun and profitable) so long as you marry her after you brutally sodomize her against her will.

And some people are daft enough to believe that Jesus is some kind of savior.

Makes sense when you think about it. After all a confession and a couple of hail Mary’s and all is forgiven, or just let Jesus into your life and you are saved no matter what you've done.

That isn't what the gospels say.

Jesus says that if you want eternal life (whatever that means because he never defines exactly what "eternal life" is) then you must follow the Commandments, and you must sell everything and give the money to the poor.

Jesus does say imply that he will forgive people for violating the Commandments, but nowhere does he say that forgiveness equates to salvation.

In other words, if someone violates the Commandments, they can cherish the thought that Jesus forgave them while they bun in Hell for all eternity.

Anyway, the problem is that people, especially christians, are weak and they always take the least difficult or painful route and so the christian religion has been deceitfully dumbed-down to the "accept Jesus and you're saved" routine to make it more palatable for the masses.

I've heard Hitler was a Christian, does that mean he's in heaven waiting to greet all the other good Christians?

According to Martin Luther, if Hitler was pre-destined for salvation then Hitler is in Heaven wearing a tupa and singing, "Holy! Holy! Holy is the Lamb!" for eternity, which really sounds like good fun.

Likewise, if Mother Teresa was pre-destined for Hell, the according to Martin Luther, Mother Teresa is rotting in Hell right now because no amount of good works will save you from predestination.

I am very excited and hopeful about China, I have been watching their progress for a few years. With more than a billion people China would certainly be a beacon of hope if they end up with a successful and fair economiic system.

Yes, indeed.

Often over-looked is the fact that China has 1.6 Billion people. How do you effectively administer to that many people?

Is democracy successful? Some people would point to European countries with very small populations and say it is, but when you start looking at countries with very large populations, like the US at 308 Million people, it isn't.

What have we seen in the US? Voters voting in their own selfish interests instead of the interests of the community and the result has been mayors and city council/aldermen (or whatever) bankrupting the cities, you see bankrupt states, a collapsing infrastructure and numerous other problems that won't be fixed any time soon.

US foreign policy is a total failure, and the Chinese are doing exactly the opposite of what the US has done, and it has been a stonking success.

The US steals the resources and profits taking 92% leaving the host nation with a paltry 8%, then oppresses the people economically, socially, culturally and politically through puppet-dictators and refuses to invest in the infrastructure, insisting the country borrow money from the IMF which it cannot repay because the US is taking all the profits out of the country.

China shares 60%-40%, doesn't repress the people, doesn't care what government or form of government is in power, and immediately starts investing money into the infrastructure to improve people's lives by building roads, and laying water, sewage and electric power lines.

There's no doubt the Chinese studied US foreign policy, discovered its many grotesque flaws and came up with a better way.

I'm sure they're doing the same thing, studying the political structure in the US (and other countries) and they will come up with a better form of government that is democratic but doesn't suffer the flaws of the US system or the European system.
 
Why don't Christians reject values derived from non-Christian thinkers and cultures, like ethics and virtue? Those can't come from Christianity, since the pagan Greeks were writing about them centuries before Jesus was born.

The answer, possibly, could be that the question itself is silly.
 
Sorry Saquist, some f my responses are tangled up in blue!

No problem, I think...I got.

I am very excited and hopeful about China, I have been watching their progress for a few years. With more than a billion people China would certainly be a beacon of hope if they end up with a successful and fair economic system.

Do we judge the ideology or the people.
We say religion, that's the ideology. Is the ideology really to blame? Like I said the message really is quite benign. I prefer to judge the people, people will always be part of the problem.

But yes, I look forward to seeing what China will become.
Really I don't see revolution in China's future, the ruling party is too powerful.
It's possible they will make slow progressive changes as they have been to adapt to the modern world and the modern people that they themselves have encouraged. I could be wrong...if Revolution occurred in China it's likely to be...costly.
 
**** Moderator note: Saquist requested that he be permanently banned from sciforums. I asked him to consider this decision carefully, but he was adamant that this is what he wanted. So, I have permanently banned him from sciforums, as requested.
 
Back
Top