How can atheism have morality?

sorry, double post. It didn't show up at first.

a reply to: cooperton

I think it was because you continually couldn't show that evolution or abiogenesis was a viable theory with empirical evidence, so you know not to get into the conversation.

Well, you would think that, wouldn’t you? Nobody is accusing you of being logical, or fair-minded.

I've gotten plenty of messages thanking me for showing the absurdity of evolution.

Yes, from people who think the same as you but lack your articulacy. Logic isn’t really your strong suit, is it?

My purpose is to speak the truth, and the fact it upsets so many secularists means I'm on the right track

It isn’t what you say that bothers this secularist, but the bad faith in which you say it.

originally posted by: Astyanax

It isn’t what you say that bothers this secularist, but the bad faith in which you say it.

Nah I think you just can't tolerate anyone who thinks differently, nor are you able to defend your belief system, so it infuriates you. That's why you've avoided me for so long. Atheism and evolutionary theory has become the same faith-based system that they critique the churches of being. You all act like you have some occult knowledge that makes you better than those who believe in intelligent design, but in actuality you've fallen for the most unintelligent theory to ever plague the human consciousness.

Imagine seeing a robot and by default assuming it came to be by random chance. It's just the dumbest possible origin of a robot. Yet humans are even more capable than a robot, we have emotions and the ability to replicate, among many other attributes. Even a garage door opener can't come to be by random chance, yet you all believe the 800,000 miles of neural circuitry in the human brain came about by the natural selection of dumb-luck random mutations. Talk about bad faith...

a reply to: cooperton

Hiya Coope.

It's awesome that you see so much beauty and wonder around you.

God unfolds this beautiful creation, regardless of whether we may be believers, or non-believers.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: cooperton

Hiya Coope.

It's awesome that you see so much beauty and wonder around you.

God unfolds this beautiful creation, regardless of whether we may be believers, or non-believers.

Cheers, it is a wonderful world we live in

originally posted by: Venkuish1

Poverty and misery result in crime.
But is it immoral to steal let's say if you are hungry or if you know you will become homeless.

Everything has good or bad repercussions it really doesn't matter the reason. You do know that just being born in America is like winning a lottery ticket. Stealing is just the easy path, and then you justify it by saying you are hungry. How about the kids who do the flash mob stealing, I'm sure they are all hungry...

Places like Portland are dying because businesses are leaving with all the crime (there must be a lot of hungry people) The homeless are filling up the streets and the locals do nothing but complain about them now when not too long ago they were screaming they are a sanctuary city. I don't think many there would know a moral if it slapped them in the face.

originally posted by: daskakik

Seems you never did.

Oh, that is harsh, didn't read past that line, so don't waste your time.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Oh, that is harsh, didn't read past that line, so don't waste your time.

I'm just pointing out a truism.

Maybe you should have read past that because it is basically this thread in a nutshell.

a reply to: whereislogic

You might be wasting your time. My mere suggestion that morals have come from a religious baseline mainly because the vast majority of people have been religious and faith is a powerful motivator has sent the crowd into a frenzy for 50 pages...

originally posted by: Xtrozero
a reply to: whereislogic

You might be wasting your time. My mere suggestion that morals have come from a religious baseline mainly because the vast majority of people have been religious and faith is a powerful motivator. That alone has sent the crowd into a frenzy for 50 pages...

Atheists don't like it when anyone believes outside their state-sanctioned mythos.

originally posted by: cooperton

Atheists don't like it when anyone believes outside their state-sanctioned mythos.

As you know, I'm basically an atheist, but I can see how things work and I don't hate or fear religion. I actually enjoy many of them...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

As you know, I'm basically an atheist, but I can see how things work and I don't hate or fear religion. I actually enjoy many of them...

Yeah, I have plenty of friends who are atheists and we have great constructive debates and conversations.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Xtrozero
a reply to: whereislogic

You might be wasting your time. My mere suggestion that morals have come from a religious baseline mainly because the vast majority of people have been religious and faith is a powerful motivator. That alone has sent the crowd into a frenzy for 50 pages...

Atheists don't like it when anyone believes outside their state-sanctioned mythos.

The irony here is that creationists are asking for evidence and proof when at the same time accept the intelligent design myth in the absence of any evidence.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

The irony here is that creationists are asking for evidence and proof when at the same time accept the intelligent design myth in the absence of any evidence.

Regarding the origin of intelligent creatures, it makes more sense that the source is intelligent rather than unintelligent. We're biological supercomputers with 800,000 miles of neural circuitry compacted into our brain to allow us all the faculties of being human. The human circulatory system is somewhere between 6x to 10x longer than all the roads in new york city combined.... It is astonishing.

It is a marvelous work of engineering beyond our comprehension, and it is indicative of an intelligent designer, as is any other functioning system.

originally posted by: andy06shake
What was it he/she was wrong about they read in your post?

I only asked one question. More than 50 people responded, but only 3 actually responded to my question. I even reread it later and I really only asked one question. Double-checked in case I was wrong. This guy said I asked more than one question. So him and a bunch of people answered a question that wasn't even asked. And he tried to say I asked more than one question. He couldn't even admit he was wrong.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Xtrozero

As you know, I'm basically an atheist, but I can see how things work and I don't hate or fear religion. I actually enjoy many of them...

Yeah, I have plenty of friends who are atheists and we have great constructive debates and conversations, because they're not the atheists that get infuriated when their beliefs are challenged.

Atheism is not a belief but the lack of belief in the supernatural world and God.

A belief in God is what differentiates someone who believes and someone who doesn't. The belief in God comes as a package as not only people believe in the invisible creator but they assume morality comes as a result of it and without it there can be no 'objective' morality or no morality at all.

Creationists not only dismiss science but they make a version that suits their fantasy by denying evolution (first and most important step) and call it a non viable theory despite the fact evolution is one of the greatest scientific theories, in a few words a fact.

They are then creating their own mathematics by arguing that the universe law of gravitation is off by 2000% before dismissing abiogenesis which is the prevailing scientific hypothesis so far and given the evidence we have.

The continuous misinterpretations (often deliberate) and lack of understanding of the most basic concepts as well as twisting of facts is what makes creationism the most absurd and laughable 'theory' where evolution via natural selection, cosmology, star and planet formation, are replaced by the beliefs in the lord and saviour of this world.

And here comes the argument of morality. After dismissing parts of science and misinterpreting the rest we get to the point where without the belief in the Harry Potter character we can't be moral.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1

The irony here is that creationists are asking for evidence and proof when at the same time accept the intelligent design myth in the absence of any evidence.

Regarding the origin of intelligent creatures, it makes more sense that the source is intelligent rather than unintelligent. We're biological supercomputers with 800,000 miles of neural circuitry compacted into our brain to allow us all the faculties of being human. The human circulatory system is somewhere between 6x to 10x longer than all the roads in new york city combined.... It is astonishing.

It is a marvelous work of engineering beyond our comprehension, and it is indicative of an intelligent designer, as is any other functioning system.

There is nothing 'marvelous' and nothing that indicates an intelligent designer. I am afraid these arguments cannot be supported as they rely on emotions and sensationalism.

'Marvelous'
'Miracle'
'Unbelievable'
'Impossible'

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1

The irony here is that creationists are asking for evidence and proof when at the same time accept the intelligent design myth in the absence of any evidence.

Regarding the origin of intelligent creatures, it makes more sense that the source is intelligent rather than unintelligent. We're biological supercomputers with 800,000 miles of neural circuitry compacted into our brain to allow us all the faculties of being human. The human circulatory system is somewhere between 6x to 10x longer than all the roads in new york city combined.... It is astonishing.

It is a marvelous work of engineering beyond our comprehension, and it is indicative of an intelligent designer, as is any other functioning system.

And the universe may contain as many as 2 trillion galaxies. So what? Do you see an intelligent designer who we need to believe to get the proper morals?

originally posted by: Venkuish1
A belief in God is what differentiates someone who believes and someone who doesn't. The belief in God comes as a package as not only people believe in the invisible creator but they assume morality comes as a result of it and without it there can be no 'objective' morality or no morality at all.

If we were created by dumb luck random mutations then it is not plausible to argue that objective morality would have been encoded into our nervous system. It would be as likely as a monkey programming the next updated AI model to have an independent sense of morality...

And here comes the argument of morality. After dismissing parts of science and misinterpreting the rest we get to the point where without the belief in the Harry Potter character we can't be moral.

Nah, more so that random chance mutations could not code for morality into neural circuits. It's just as dumb an idea as the theory of evolution itself. I don't say "dumb" as an ad hominem, but rather, evolution by its own premise is a dumb unintelligent theory regarding the origin of intelligent creatures. Especially regarding the origins of neural circuitry that allows us a sense of morality.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

There is nothing 'marvelous' and nothing that indicates an intelligent designer. I am afraid these arguments cannot be supported as they rely on emotions and sensationalism.

'Marvelous'
'Miracle'
'Unbelievable'
'Impossible'

Well yeah because you believe it came to be without intelligence, of course you will have the most unintelligent opinion about the human body. How someone isn't in awe of 800,000 miles of neural circuitry compacted into a human skull is beyond me.