Atheism

@Frank Apisa,

Everything okay with you, Frank? I've got to wonder because I agree with you.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Literal is you. I was just having fun at your expense, that's all.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Everything okay with you, Frank? I've got to wonder because I agree with you.

Yeah, I'm okay. Still getting older...which is one of the things I wanna keep doing.

And how about you?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Still getting older...which is one of the things I wanna keep doing.

It sure beats the alternative, doesn't it.

Frank Apisa wrote:

And how about you?

Still fat. Fortunately not quite as fat as your font on A2K.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Any “rights” we have are far from “inalienable.”

Granted, Frank. Like I said in response to Arg: It's question of theory, not practice.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

If you believe in human rights, you believe in something supernatural.

I was responding to the above quote. But every definition I find concerning inalienable rights a.k.a human rights is defined as Natural Rights and doesn't refer to anything remotely concerning supernatural? Any comments guys?

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

a.k.a human rights is defined as Natural Rights

I already made that point myself, Arg, several times. But "natural law' is just a term used to distinguish it from "positive law' (man-made laws). It's still a metaphysical concept--it just happens to be one that omits God from the picture (which many, including the drafters of the declaration of independence, say is the basis for "inalienable rights').

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

I already made that point myself, Arg, several times. But "natural law' is just a term used to distinguish it from "positive law' (man-made laws). It's still a metaphysical concept--it just happens to be one that omits God from the picture (which many, including the drafters of the declaration of independence, say is the basis for "inalienable rights').

No disagreement, but doesn't that contradicts max statement that if you believe in human rights, you believe in something supernatural?

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

No disagreement, but doesn't that contradicts max statement that if you believe in human rights, you believe in something supernatural?

No, not at all, at least not in my opinion. "Supernatural" simply means outside of nature. Anything that's "natural" by most definitions, can be studied and experimented with by the scientific method. Abstract concepts are not those kind of objects.

Quote:

Naturalism is an approach to philosophical problems that interprets them as tractable through the methods of the empirical sciences or at least, without a distinctively a priori project of theorizing.
Naturalism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
www.iep.utm.edu/naturali/

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

I suppose, like anything else, you can define things in other ways that suit you better, for purposes of what you want to assert. though.

0 Replies

@argome321,

Quote:

Since you make the assertion you have to prove that many rights I enjoy are from religion, this is utter nonsense.

This is a lengthy topic in itself, but if I give some examples...

An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth...this was an attempt with varying degrees of success to make ALL people equal, even slaves and nobles . It came from God so it had to be obeyed, despite the resistance from the Nobles .

Abraham being asked to stop when slaying his son was a rejection of child sacrifice, something the Semites called Phoenician continued to do whilst the Semites in the Levant ceased to do...because God ordered it .

"that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

Most changes in law have in the past required greater authority than opinion and the crown . Try it here . Come up with a Law and see if anyone objects . But in a religious society, you will toe the line .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

This is a lengthy topic in itself, but if I give some examples...

And that's not to even mention the centuries of (often bloody) conflict to resist having a state religion imposed upon people and otherwise resisting measures which limited the freedom of religion. These struggles generated new formulations of what "inalienable rights" entailed.

0 Replies

The Declaration of Independence has no force as law in the United States, and never has had. So i guess Layman and I-Anus are going to make this their playground. just **** all over the thread, because the concept if infamous to their preferred superstition. Let me guess, they haven't anything better to do, and haven't the intelligence to begin interesting threads. No surprises there.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Best worthless contribution yet, **** for brains ! If you had nursey bring your reading glasses, you would have noticed I am Agnostic . Try with your false teeth in, because your comments so far have no bite .

Quote:

The Declaration of Independence has no force as law in the United States

Its too late for you to learn anything in the old folks home library, but for anyone else the Declaration of Independence served a s a rejection of the Law of Britain that would label them traitors . It also served as a basis for the Constitution by saying where they got the right to make new laws from...but you dont know anything except how to big mouth yourself, do you **** for brains ?

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Simple Question Ionus, Which do you think emerged first family and clan or religion?

Quote:

An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth...this was an attempt with varying degrees of success to make ALL people equal, even slaves and nobles . It came from God so it had to be obeyed, despite the resistance from the Nobles .

Abraham being asked to stop when slaying his son was a rejection of child sacrifice, something the Semites called Phoenician continued to do whilst the Semites in the Levant ceased to do...because God ordered it .

"that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

Most changes in law have in the past required greater authority than opinion and the crown . Try it here . Come up with a Law and see if anyone objects .
But in a religious society, you will toe the line .

Long before Christianity other forms of religion existed.

But The question you posed was that my morals are religious based and you haven't proven that.

Your statement as quoted:

Quote:

Many of the rights you now enjoy come from religion .

Finally, you have to prove god existence if you are attributing morality to a god and I don't believe you can.

1 Reply

@argome321,

Quote:

Simple Question Ionus, Which do you think emerged first family and clan or religion?

Family and clan and we have our basic morality in common with chimpanzees .

Quote:

Long before Christianity other forms of religion existed.

Two of the 3 examples I gave were Jewish not Christian .

Quote:

But The question you posed was that my morals are religious based and you haven't proven that

No, we disagreed about inalienable rights and my argument has been that civilisation has taken away rights and religion has tried to restore them . After many centuries of soaking in religion, civilisation finally caught up . Your morals, my morals anyone's morals are tribal/group based . Religion has nothing to do with morals .

Quote:

you have to prove god existence if you are attributing morality to a god and I don't believe you can.

Damn straight I cant . No one can . I am not attributing morality to God . I am attributing inalienable rights to religion .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

Re: argome321 (Post 5923194)
Quote:
Simple Question Ionus, Which do you think emerged first family and clan or religion?
Family and clan and we have our basic morality in common with chimpanzees .
Quote:
Long before Christianity other forms of religion existed.
Two of the 3 examples I gave were Jewish not Christian .
Quote:

But The question you posed was that my morals are religious based and you haven't proven that
No, we disagreed about inalienable rights and my argument has been that civilisation has taken away rights and religion has tried to restore them . After many centuries of soaking in religion, civilisation finally caught up . Your morals, my morals anyone's morals are tribal/group based . Religion has nothing to do with morals .
Quote:
you have to prove god existence if you are attributing morality to a god and I don't believe you can.
Damn straight I cant . No one can . I am not attributing morality to God . I am attributing inalienable rights to religion .

1)There were religions long before Jewish, Muslim and christian etc. and for the most part they're poor examples of mortality.
What about Eastern philosophies and eastern religions?

2) People are going to believe what ever they are going to believe religious based or not.

3) How 'bout this - my morality is based on my empathy, compassion and reasoning skills? Perfect..no. Flawed...yes. It works for me.

I can not speak for others. I think we pick and choose according to our own understanding and perceived needs and abilities.

2 Replies

@argome321,

Quote:

I can not speak for others. I think we pick and choose according to our own understanding and perceived needs and abilities.

And education.

Western values are indeed religion-based for some part, but not from only the Judeo-Christian track, IMO. Pre-christian Europe had lists of 'virtues' which defined how a real man should behave ('vir'=man in latin), more aggressive than judeo-christian morality. Paul tried to replace them with Christian virtues but it did not work. These are still around, i believe. Eg Kipling poem "if you can do this and that... you will be a man my son".

The primary Roman virtues were:

Auctoritas — "Spiritual Authority" — The sense of one's social standing, built up through experience, Pietas, and Industria. This was considered to be essential for a magistrate's ability to enforce law and order.
Comitas — "Humour" — Ease of manner, courtesy, openness, and friendliness.
Constantia — "Perseverance" — Military stamina, as well as general mental and physical endurance in the face of hardship.
Clementia — "Mercy" — Mildness and gentleness, and the ability to set aside previous transgressions.
Dignitas — "Dignity" — A sense of self-worth, personal self-respect & self-esteem.
Disciplina — "Discipline" — Considered essential to military excellence; also connotes adherence to the legal system, and upholding the duties of citizenship.
Firmitas — "Tenacity" — Strength of mind, and the ability to stick to one's purpose at hand without wavering.
Frugalitas — "Frugality" — Economy and simplicity in lifestyle, without being miserly.
Gravitas — "Gravity" — A sense of the importance of the matter at hand; responsibility, and being earnest.
Honestas — "Respectability" — The image that one presents as a respectable member of society.
Humanitas — "Humanity" — Refinement, civilization, learning, and generally being cultured.
Industria — "Industriousness" — Hard work.
Iustitia — "Justice" — Sense of moral worth to an action; personified by the goddess Iustitia, the Roman counterpart to the Greek Themis.
Pietas — "Dutifulness" — More than religious piety; a respect for the natural order: socially, politically, and religiously. Includes ideas of patriotism, fulfillment of pious obligation to the gods, and honoring other human beings, especially in terms of the patron and client relationship, considered essential to an orderly society.
Prudentia — "Prudence" — Foresight, wisdom, and personal discretion.
Salubritas — "Wholesomeness" — General health and cleanliness, personified in the deity Salus.
Severitas — "Sternness" — Self-control, considered to be tied directly to the virtue of gravitas.
Veritas — "Truthfulness" — Honesty in dealing with others, personified by the goddess Veritas. Veritas, being the mother of Virtus, was considered the root of all virtue; a person living an honest life was bound to be virtuous.
Virtus — "Manliness" — Valor, excellence, courage, character, and worth. 'Vir' is Latin for "man".

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

But long before christian faith etc many of those same values were echoed in In Eastern World.

But more to the point - my question is why would anyone want to adhere to any religious doctrines?

And in answering that question you will see that not everyone needs religion to develop a moral code of ethics. Experience has a lot to do with it I think.
that is my point.

I'm not speaking for anyone but myself -and my moral compass is not dictated by religious tenets.

In fact as a child I constantly rebelled against adult authority because I felt many adults were more immature than most kids and failed miserably at their responsibilities, that many were out and out liars and abusers and could not be trusted.

That many adults were not to be believed.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Damn straight I cant . No one can . I am not attributing morality to God . I am attributing inalienable rights to religion .

I was thinking about this statement. I might be wrong because admittedly I am not an expert on religion..guilty as charged. If I misunderstand let me know.

It is my understanding that Christianity is the religion of Catholics, Protestants Baptist etc. The Bible is the Book of Christianity and considered the word of god..is it not? I have heard many times that Christians get their morals from this Bible? This book is suppose to dictate their behavior? Are not human rights based on our moral and ethics tenets as most religious dogmas? I guess the better question is where does this inalienable right come from for you?

Quote:

re·li·gion
rəˈlijən/
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
"ideas about the relationship between science and religion"
synonyms: faith, belief, worship, creed; More
a particular system of faith and worship.
plural noun: religions
"the world's great religions"
a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.

.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices:
a world council of religions.
4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:
to enter religion.
5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience:
to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7.
religions, Archaic. religious rites:
painted priests performing religions deep into the night.
Expand

I tried different definitions to balance it fairly as possible.

Including below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

2 Replies

@argome321,

Quote:

I guess the better question is where does this inalienable right come from for you?

Ionus can of course answer for himself, Arg, and I'm not trying to answer for him. I'm just making a few observations, that's all.

There have been any number of ways suggested to give a metaphysical basis, without reference to god, for "natural law." Plato, for example, posited a realm of so-called "forms" where the perfect models for things we see in nature exist. He believed that such "forms" as "the form of justice" subsisted in this realm, for example.

Other metaphysical theories take different approaches, but ultimately they all seem to be based on the metaphysical assumption that our "a priori" powers of deduction can inform us about the "truth." That's why it is generally acknowledged that belief in "natural law" is, in essence, a "supernatural" belief.

Again, I suppose that whether or not you want to call those kinds of beliefs "supernatural" is simply a matter of definition. It seems that it is that word which troubles you. Of course, if one says that anything that exists is "natural," then if there is a god, then, under that definition, god cannot be "supernatural" (because he/it exists). But that is not the standard definition.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know