Originally posted by FetchmyjunkWho has claimed that murdering a million people is not wrong?
If people can't decide to believe things and someone just happens to be an atheist, and happens to believe there is no absolute right or wrong and murders a million people because of those beliefs it's not their fault right since they didn't choose those beliefs.
Isn't it you who has claimed that murdering a million people is merely wrong/evil to the exact same degree as being prideful or lustful?
There are those who think that life
Has nothing left to chance
With a host of holy horrors
To direct our aimless dance
A planet of playthings
We dance on the strings
Of powers we cannot perceive
“The stars aren’t aligned –
Or the gods are malign”
Blame is better to give than receive
You can choose a ready guide
In some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide
You still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears
And kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that’s clear
I will choose free will.
There are those who think that
They were dealt a losing hand
The cards were stacked against them
They weren’t born in Lotus-Land.
All pre-ordained
A prisoner in chains
A victim of venomous fate
Kicked in the face
You can’t pray for a place
In Heaven’s unearthly estate
Each of us
A cell of awareness
Imperfect and incomplete
Genetic blends
With uncertain ends
On a fortune hunt
That’s far too fleet…
-- Neil Peart
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkWhat do you mean by "objective standard"? You keep asking about it but never come up with a convincing example of what you mean. All you've offered is some sort completely subjective and arbitrary preference and promotion of a mish-mash of ancient Hebrew mythology and later offshoots. And what's that "morality" that you tout: everything is equally evil ~ everything is punished exactly the same and by stupendous cruelty ~ some are recipients of "undeserved mercy" ~ and Christians can unilaterally declare themselves "forgiven". You have only offered that kind of incoherent nonsense and no "objective standard" at all.
By what objective standard would you measure varying degrees of evil?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkMy point is that he cannot simply choose to believe something regarding the kind of supernatural phenomena that people like you and my Muslim neighbour or my Hindu colleague just so happen to believe in while, at the same time, none of you are able to demonstrate the truth or existence of any of it.
Why would he choose to believe something that he has decided is not believable?
Originally posted by FMFHe is the one that decides whether I have been able or unable to demonstrate the the truth or existence something. He is the judge of the evidence I present, no one else is. Of course he won't choose to believe in something that he has rejected.
My point is that he [b]cannot simply choose to believe something regarding the kind of supernatural phenomena that people like you and my Muslim neighbour or my Hindu colleague just so happen to believe in while being unable to demonstrate the truth or existence of any of it.[/b]
Originally posted by FMFIf God doesn't exist there is no universal standard for good and evil. If he does exist, then he is the lawmaker.
What do you mean by "objective standard"? You keep asking about it but never come up with a convincing example of what you mean. All you've offered is some sort completely subjective and arbitrary preference and promotion of a mish-mash of ancient Hebrew mythology and later offshoots. And what's that "morality" that you tout: everything is equally evil ~ everyth ...[text shortened]... ven". You have only offered that kind of incoherent nonsense and no "objective standard" at all.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAnd why do you think it's "morally perfect" for him to be tortured for eternity by a supernatural being if he is unable to "choose" to believe something that is unbelievable?
He is the one that decides whether I have been able or unable to demonstrate the the truth or existence something. He is the judge of the evidence I present, no one else is. Of course he won't choose to believe in something that he has rejected.