Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 7:42 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord said: "...if you think I'm just nutz"

Yep! You asked for that! :-) Seriously, I would like to continue this conversation, but it's well after midnight here, so it'll have to wait till tomorrow.

I assume you're in the US, so enjoy the rest of your day!

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:35 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

My post was too long for one hit!

You said: "If, as so many are doing these days, we 'overwrite' the conscience with another code that says (in effect) I make my own reality and live by my own rules that put me in first position over your apparent need, then we see a breakdown in society and cooperation with one another."

But that's not what happens in general and it hasn't really changed over the centuries. Of course some people are selfish, but there are always those who do effectively abide by the Golden Rule (and laws of the land) and live perfectly moral lives - many without a belief in a god.

"This is why God put down to us a written code as a guideline to follow."

I'm still not sure where this 'code' is and when humans were given it, although I assume, if you 'do not believe in evolution' (I have a problem with that phrase!), then do you believe god put Adam and Eve on earth and we are all descended from them? Please excuse my ignorance on this: I know there are some who do believe this, but I'm not sure what you believe in this area.

"what we innately believe to be true; i.e, treating others the way we would like to be treated by others."

Now I'm confused what you mean: if it is innate, then it is a trait that (I would say) id the result of millennia of evolution and (you might say) is because god put that principle there.

"God's solution for that is to send a Savior in Jesus Christ that through His loving us first we may in turn love Him and one another and be given the power to fulfill the law."

Now we're really getting into things I just can't comprehend! As a solution to a perceived problem, allowing your own son to be killed seems a bit of a hard thing to swallow for an omnipotent being! I'm sure you'll excuse my disbelief at this, and I'm sure you've heard it all before!

"This may not be what you wanted to hear, but I find it is not only backed by what the Creator says in Scripture but also what God has shown us of His Nature by loving us and empowering us with that same love."

I have several difficulties with this: I see the bible as being written by man, not god nor man inspired by god. If this is his way of showing his love, giving us a world full of natural disasters, disease, the ability to be so selfish that millions die of starvation every year, yet do nothing about it as if it part of his unknowable plan, then I see him as a god I can't look up to as a paragon of virtue and moral behaviour!

I do need to say, DelightntheLord, that I do appreciate our discussion. It has been informative and interesting and always polite. Thanks.

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:34 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord said: "What do most of these animals do to the weakest of their species,(the old and sick); they do not attempt to nurse them back to health nor do they normally ensure that the weakest would get a fair share of food to survive, they generally leave them behind to die as they serve no purpose or can no longer 'cooperate' with and for the good of the pack or the herd."

There certainly are some animals who do leave old and sick siblings behind, but many do not. Just a few examples:
Dolphins support sick or injured animals, swimming under them for hours at a time and pushing them to the surface so they can breathe.
Bonobos have been observed aiding injured or handicapped bonobos.
Walruses have been seen adopting orphans who lost their parents to predators.

Anyway, you do talk about 'most of these animals', implying you do accept that some animals do support the old and sick.

"Humans are not like this...YET. With the advent of all the TV shows like Survivor and Weakest Link, we are seeing an application of this very thing we see in the animal world. How long do you think we will have a social structure if we keep emulating the animal kingdom in excercises such as this? But I digress."

Since there are some animals who do look after their old and sick, I can't see how you can use this as a differentiator with humans.

"I do not believe in evolution..."

Do you mean you think that no animals change over time, adapting to suit their environment, with survival of the fittest?

"but if I ascribe to this belief in any way, I'd say humans are "de-volving" as we no longer structure our society on moral belief as we see morals as religion based and of course, there is a movement afoot to keep religion out of the public domain and thus undermining the moral code...but that is outside the scope of our discussion here."

I think this is entirely pertinent to our discussion: what's the evidence that we are 'de-evolving' (I assume you mean morality is on a downward slide)?

You need to be clear what you mean by the 'public domain'. Are you talking about what the State becomes involved in? Or do you mean people are being prevented from practising their religion?

"I believe we are given a conscience by way of a Creator that has incorporated a code (maybe like a DNA) within each of us for an appreciation of the "Golden Rule'; do unto to others as we would have done unto us."

Well, if god did encode it in our DNA, he messed up a bit since there are obviously many who do NOT ascribe to it! You'd have thought he could have made it universal.

"The 10 commandments were given to highlight or point to this golden rule."

Only some of the ten are in sympathy with the Golden Rule. I can't see you can argue that only having one god or resting on a Sunday has anything to do with it.

Continued...

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:31 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord

I think we're misunderstanding each other! I think it would help if you could tell me whereabouts you think the ten commandments fell in the evolution of man. Or do you think we were given a moral code prior to this? If so, when?

Just one point, however. You said: "It seems we would be better able to survive if we operated in a ruthless, immoral way, but most of us do not."

This isn't necessarily the case. There are numerous other species of animal who thrive on cooperation, not confrontation and there is nothing to say that operating 'in a ruthless, immoral way' would be a better survival technique for any particular species - they have all evolved to fit their niche in the animal kingdom: some are more ruthless than others, but some cooperate and help each other. If all animals were ruthless, there would be no herds or packs of animals - they would all be individuals eking out their existence alone.

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord said: "Zeno, "Society can't survive without the common moral values..."

I couldn't agree with you more, but why do you suppose man 'evolved' with a conscience and a moral code if not from being created in the image of God? The golden rule: do unto others as you would have done to you is very much a Biblical concept."

No it's not: it was first written down (long before Jesus) by K'ung-fu-tzu (Confucius) and probably existed long before that.

But you've missed my point: how did humans ever get to that stage if not by cooperating and considering others? If homo sapiens were ruthless, totally immoral creatures, how did they ever manage to survive?

"No other mammals have this ability, where did it come from?"

Other mammals also have this ability. Many apes live in groups and they can only do this by considering others - they have a 'moral code' that's evolved to work for the best of that group to ensure its survival.

"Do not kill; do not steal; do not covet your neighbor's belongings (envy); do not bear false witness are not religious concepts."

I did not say these were religious concepts: what I said was that the first (four) of the ten (ie only having one god, having no idols, not taking his name in vain, keeping Sundays to worship him) are religious precepts.

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Thu Dec 18, 2008 6:56 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord said: "Zeno, what are your values based on if not from, let's say, the 10 Comandments?"

The question is: what are the ten commandments based upon (indeed, which ten commandments - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_commandments)? How did humanity evolve so far that homo sapiens were able to talk, build cities, herd, produce crops, play games, discover fire, invent the wheel, read and write, debate, discuss, etc, etc? All this required cooperation between humans, putting aside any differences: it required a moral code. They did not go around always stealing from each other; they did not go around always killing each other; they did not always go around lying to each other, they did not always go around raping each other's women, they did not always go around coveting their neighbour's possessions...if they had, there would have been no towns and villages or even tribes, just warring individuals - or perhaps the human race would have become extinct long ago.

To get to the stage in evolution where man was able to read the tablets supposedly given to Moses by God required one heck of a evolved society that already had rules and laws and moral behaviours that encouraged cooperation and altruistic behaviours and discouraged selfish ones. Of course there were murderers and thieves and adulterers, but nothing much has changed: there still are murderers and thieves and adulterers.

What did the ten commandments give to man, then, and what did they change? Well, the bit about only having one god, having no idols, not taking his name in vain, keeping Sundays to worship him...these are religious precepts, nothing more and they are not common moral values.

Society can't survive without the common moral values that existed long before the ten commandments were ever dreamt of, but it can survive (and must of society does) without the add-on commandments of a god concerned about people only worshipping him and him alone: those I reject, not the others. At least we have something in common! :-)

I haven't forgotten what you replied in answer to my question about freedom of religion and I'll return to that later.

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:10 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord

Do you believe in freedom of religion? Does everyone have the right to believe what they want?

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Wed Dec 17, 2008 4:17 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

DelightntheLord said: "I believe the state is very involved in religion; that is, the banning of it."

In what way is the state 'banning' religion? I assume you're talking about the USA?

"we are not intended to have a theocracy here of one religion over another."

I'm glad we agree! But I'm not sure everyone will agree. I'm sure many in the USA want Christianity to have full control over the State and the lives of everyone.

"However, in that there is no prohibition between the state and God....just as the wording in the first paragraph of each state constitution it still says, " we are grateful to Almighty God..."

This has yet to be removed by the state but I'm sure that an arson fire or two, an unhappy atheist or raging, protesting crowds, or bombs and threats might make our secularist, elected officials determine to change it. But watch out God may allow them to do it."

I think you've got atheist confused with some religionists or terrorists. And why would god allow them to do that? Isn't be omni-benevolent and omnipotent?

What do you mean by the word 'secularist'?

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Wed Dec 17, 2008 11:47 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

shooter38

I freely admit I don't know that much about the Constitution or the Founding Fathers, but I do know that many think the Constitution ensures the separation of church and state.

I'll do some research and try to respond more fully later. Perhaps you could recommend some history books that haven't been altered to fit the conservative.religious agenda? :-)

Attorneys for Atheist Soldier to Add New Allegations

zeno »

Wed Dec 17, 2008 1:22 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

bjhirning said: "Why doesn't anyone remember how this country got started.
It was through Biblical principles that this country was started."

No. It was founded on the principles of freedom of religion and freedom from the state becoming involved in religion. Or do you think the freedom is simply the freedom to impose religion on everyone else?

"Who stands for this country? Our military serves this country diligently, with respect and honor."

Take a look at www.atheistfoxholes.org to find out all about the many atheists fighting for their country with diligence, respect and honour.

"It makes me sick to my stomache that people have to squeeze out our beliefs."

Just one atheist is managing to squeeze out all those Christian beliefs out of you? Come off it. He's not omnipotent! All he's wants is to stop Christians imposing their beliefs on others - that's what freedom is all about, isn't it?

"Do you think for one minute that athiests believe in money or justice?"

See above website.

"God is the ultimate Judge and you know what it says on our money. Forgive me for going off but why don't people realize that taking God out of the equation is ruining our ecomony, justice, children, and our country. When are we as Christ followers going to say "NO MORE!"

Wait a minute! You've just had an extremely religious President who took every opportunity to bring religion into everything and you're now complaining there still isn't enough?

"If you have no beliefs, than why are you in the military?"

Having no belief in any kind of supreme being is not the same as having no values.

Creation Museum Mixes Christmas and Dinosaurs

zeno »

Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:20 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 2

Well said, wwfsmd! Unless, of course you consider the 'Creation Museum' to be just for the living dinosaurs! :-)

Anglicans Add Hindu Snowmen, Chinese Dragon to Christmas Displays

zeno »

Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:17 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

The CofE are fighting a losing battle to keep their flock and they will do anything they can to keep shoving religion at us. Of course (in their eyes), any religion is better then no religion. :-)

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:14 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

www.talkorigins.org is a very good place to start for those who know nothing about evolution and the vast amount of evidence to support it (and to demolish the creationist 'arguments' against it). Recommended reading.

If you also need an introduction to the scientific method, try Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method, essential knowledge if you're going to argue against science and its hypotheses, theories and experiments.

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:49 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

We're members of the Brights as well - I'm sure you'll feel quite at home on TH!

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Sun Dec 14, 2008 5:03 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

matucon312: Would you be interested in joining us on our discussion forum at Think Humanism (Google it)? Please come and have a look!

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:28 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Ah! It is an urban myth (in case anyone was in doubt!) that's been well debunked at snopes.com.

http://www.snopes.com/religion/lostday.asp

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:25 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Daniel said: "It was a study in astronomy. I'll try to find the link. In short, everything in our universe moves. The earth rotates around the sun...our solar system moves through space...and so on. What they found in the study is that the earth isn't facing the right way. It's like a gear that jumped a few teeth. It's like one day was longer than the rest. How they figured this out I don't know. I do know the study wasn't done by Christians. They also managed to prove the days were steady throughout recorded history back through the Romans and the Greeks ruling out a gradual shift and indicating the 'bump' happened before that time.

Again, I'll see if I can find it on the web. Anyone else remember this study?"

I look forward to reading it...

Pro-God Christmas Ads Take On Atheist Bus Campaign

zeno »

Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:23 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

JonnyBlad said: "Do Atheists really exist?

http://polemos.net/Do%20Atheists%20Exist.html"

Ha ha ha! Nice spoof site! :-)

Court to Decide on Bible Distribution at Public Schools

zeno »

Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:31 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Daniel said: "a star exploding is a mini big bang."

No it isn't! They are completely different things. As I said, go and read up about 101 cosmology. Wikipedia will do.

Oxford Junior Dictionary Drops Christian Words

zeno »

Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:58 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 1

Daniel

Your last answer is so full of things that are just way off the mark!

Between the UK and the US, which country is most religious? (Answer: All polls show the US is by a wide margin.)

Which has the highest murder rate? (Answer: the US rate is about four times that of the UK)

Which has the highest execution rate? (Answer: the UK hasn't executed anyone since 1964.)