- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
27 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterSo it boils down to:
Of course the premise is applicable to both good and bad acts.
Some people (theists or atheists) will use religion as one of their excuses/reasons for doing good or bad things.
Other people doesn't need an excuse/reason and will do good or bad things without any excuse/reason.
Good. Or, at least, I agree. 🙂
Now the question remains, is there a third category -- are some deeds (good or bad) done with something other than religion as an excuse/reason. For example, are some deeds done with the general values of secular humanism as a basis? Or, as the OP states, in their name?
"Secular Humanism, alternatively known as Humanism (often with a capital H to distinguish it from other forms of humanism), is a secular philosophy. It embraces human reason, ethics, and justice while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience or superstition as the basis of morality and decision-making.
Though it posits that human beings are capable of being ethical and moral without religion or God, it neither assumes humans to be inherently evil or innately good, nor presents humans as "above nature" or superior to it. Rather, the Humanist life stance emphasizes the unique responsibility facing humanity and the ethical consequences of human decisions." (wikipedia)
I think, yes, and I think many folks do not see this as a viable option.
27 Feb 12
Originally posted by JS357Think of it like this, you what direction up is right? You know that because of
So it boils down to:
Some people (theists or atheists) will use religion as one of their excuses/reasons for doing good or bad things.
Other people doesn't need an excuse/reason and will do good or bad things without any excuse/reason.
Good. Or, at least, I agree. 🙂
Now the question remains, is there a third category -- are some deeds (good or ba ...[text shortened]... s." (wikipedia)
I think, yes, and I think many folks do not see this as a viable option.
what you use to define that term. So if there wasn't a common cause for the
defining of up, would there be an up?
Kelly
29 Feb 12
Originally posted by KellyJayThink of it like this, you know what direction up is right? You know that
Think of it like this, you what direction up is right? You know that because of
what you use to define that term. So if there wasn't a common cause for the
defining of up, would there be an up?
Kelly
because of what you use to define that term. So if there wasn't a common
cause for the defining of up, would there be an up?
Kelly
When I wrote that the first time I could have sworn I had the (know) in there.
Kelly
29 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by avalanchethecatI disagree. Indeed hypothetically, supposing we could agree to some metric by which we could exhaustively, and fairly say some person is "evil", we could form a collection of all such people and remove them from this discussion. Those which we are left to discuss now are either, in some sense good or at least not evil.
Do we have to keep having this argument? Evil nutbags will do horrible things, it's just what people are like. Some of them will be religious evil nutbags and some of them will be atheist evil nutbags. There is no correlation between goodness/evil and religion.
What is being argued is that religion is more likely to inspire acts of evil amongst these people than it is likely to inspire good, I assert this is true, not least because most of the so-called divine commands and acts of the Bible deity are by any reasonable standards evil in themselves - as such anyone who takes inspiration from this book runs the greater risk of being tainted by it than being improved by it.
29 Feb 12
The point of this thread is that theists will be embolden to do something clearly bad and think it is good because of the bible. In the past, that would include burning witches and blasphemers at the stake for example. Today, it would include denying gays the right to marriage, or in the case of JWs, not donating blood to save another person's life, or in the case of Hitler, murdering Jews, or right now, Christian right wing nut jobs would deny women birth control and prevent stem cell research.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
29 Feb 12
Originally posted by KellyJayI leave out words or unwittingly delete them all the.
[b]Think of it like this, you know what direction up is right? You know that
because of what you use to define that term. So if there wasn't a common
cause for the defining of up, would there be an up?
Kelly
When I wrote that the first time I could have sworn I had the (know) in there.
Kelly[/b]
Well, I personally think we can explain moral "up" this way: we define things as social goods for fundamentally secular humanistic reasons, and then we dress them up in sacred garments to give them added stature, so "up" is first agreed on, and is then enshrined in religion. That is a key social function of religion. (This position does not deny theism; God could have designed it that way.)
Once the religious moral framework and system is in place, new or modified rules can be presented as coming, without the first step, directly from God, such as the 15 -- oops, make that 10 -- commandments.
29 Feb 12
Originally posted by 667joeEveryone has a baseline, something we use to plumb good or bad. So is there
The point of this thread is that theists will be embolden to do something clearly bad and think it is good because of the bible. In the past, that would include burning witches and blasphemers at the stake for example. Today, it would include denying gays the right to marriage, or in the case of JWs, not donating blood to save another person's life, or in ...[text shortened]... w, Christian right wing nut jobs would deny women birth control and prevent stem cell research.
one better than another, does it matter? You may think yours is best and want
to push your views against anothers, you may think your views are best and
force your views upon another, you may think everything goes and still push
your views upon another.
Some think abortion is a crime of killing, for those that believe in life to that
level I'd say have more to complain about than all the witch burnings put
together.
You throw the word "rights" around, and who gives those rights, or is it
something we just demand and might makes right?
Kelly
29 Feb 12
Originally posted by 667joeI have never seen a single person say they would deny birth control, where
The point of this thread is that theists will be embolden to do something clearly bad and think it is good because of the bible. In the past, that would include burning witches and blasphemers at the stake for example. Today, it would include denying gays the right to marriage, or in the case of JWs, not donating blood to save another person's life, or in ...[text shortened]... w, Christian right wing nut jobs would deny women birth control and prevent stem cell research.
did that come from?
Kelly