Atheists... Your life is pointless

I've always wondered why people that are so adamant about the non-existence of God, debate morals and what is right and wrong. If there is no God and this world is truly just a cosmic fluke, than your life and everything that happens in it are of no consequence whatsoever. Why not just do whatever you want and not care about others. After all, survival of the fittest is the name of the game right? Love of others is just some accidental emotion that means nothing. So do whatever you want. Your life, your children's life, and your children's children's life will all be over soon and nothing will be remembered.

But I essentially just got told by two atheist that I can't be a good person and my life doesn't have meaning-

So, anyone who needs God, god or a goddess to be a good person and to have a life of meaning, is not and has none.

What gets me in a laughing mode is that the God-squad mut be relatively insecure about their beliefs. AS a commited Orthodox Agnostic , I ay, whatever rows yer boat is fine for you.

MAy not work for the religious because it is a rather mechanistic explanation and theres a minimum of dogma.

Just quit bothering me and casting minuendos, its childish.

SO lets not hop on the high moral soapbox aidan.

Those schools which Universitys they call,
'Twere well for England were there none at all.
With ease the loss the nation might sustain,
Supply'd by Goodman's Fields and Drury-Lane .
Oxford and Cambridge are not worth one farthing,
Compar'd to Haymarket, and Covent-Garden.

Quote:

I'm confused about your statement about "Christian" being used as a derogatory term.

Does this exchange help clear up what I may have been referring to?

plainoldme said:

Quote:

So, anyone who needs God, god or a goddess to be a good person and to have a life of meaning, is not and has none.

To which you responded:

Quote:

I'd agree mostly on this

.

So a person who identifies as a Christian has to hear many, many times and over and over that they are somehow lacking - they're either delusional or weak or insane....you name it- I've heard it right here on this forum - to the point where I feel that because I believe in God, I could claim membership in a reviled and stereotyped minority just by calling myself a Christian.

Quote:

If your morals have a Christian basis, but the construction of Christian morals were in fact copied from previous pagan cultures, then aren't your morals then pagan in their foundation? Continue to repeat this process, and at some point, no moral has any real religious foundation, just a social one.

If all of these things came naturally to people, why then did they need to be written down at all- anywhere - from the Book of the Dead to The Bible?

And basically you're making my point. Since people have kept written records, religion has been at least a subset of their social structure. In other words - it just 'is'. Why?

Quote:

The teachings of Fred Rogers are a good tool for guiding positive human interaction and behavior as well. Mr Rogers doesn't have to be a deity for it to be valid, and I can evaluate on my own whether his message is useful or not

Diest - you may be too young to know this but guess what? Fred Rogers was an ordained Christian Minister.

Quote:

The story of Jesus can be profound and meaningful without having to be true. As an atheist, I can learn the story and find value in it as a piece of fiction just as much.

I also said that - two or three pages back:

Quote:

I think that's where Christ's lessons are good ones for all of us- maybe the atheist could try reading the Bible for the main idea - even if they don't believe in a god.

Quote:

Additionally, you've actually described humans in a way which at surface level seems accurate, but doesn't square with history or even our actual nature as an animal. We are not eagles, we do not survive on on our own. We do not thrive as individuals. As animals, we aren't particularly strong or fast. As for senses, we do not have the best eyesight, hearing, smell, or tactile ability. We are social animals.

Our fit to our environment and our ability to survive (and thrive) as a species so long has come from our cooperative social behaviors, not our ability to survive on our own.

Food for thought, think about other animals. Where do you see the selfishness you describe as an evolutionary advantage?

Right, but we have a long history of tribalism. That's the level at which the selfishness becomes an evolutionary advantage. And even the fact that it is beneficial to be a member of a tribe as opposed to a lone and isolated individual is oftentimes more based on what is most advantageous to an individual rather than an inborn or innate desire.

So I go back to the fact that to do unto others as you'd have them do unto you is usually not innately or naturally out of the 'goodness' of anyone's heart- it's a survival mechanism within groups but often not outside of a group.

You can even see it here, now and today- 'This one is my friend (member of my tribe) so I'll treat them this way' - but this one is not my friend (member of my tribe) so what happens to them is not my problem.

Quote:

Many animals are probably better at it's application than humans are.

Within established packs - I believe that. Outside of established herds or packs? I'd like you to show me that.

If the only thing keeping you from murdering, raping, and thieving is a belief in a god, then you are dangerous and morally fragile.

Murdering people, carrying off their daughters and taking over their lands looks to be how we actually are and how we would be with no belief in a Christian God.

I don't recall the story in detail, but my recollection provides my point.

Peoples unified belief in a religious system that allows a world like ours does not prevent these things. It empowers men to do the very things their religious ideals condemn.

It is a stock jobbing age, ev'ry thing has its price; marriage is a traffick throughout; as most of us bargain to be husbands, so some of us bargain to be cuckolds; and he would as much be laugh'd at , who preferred his love to his interest, at this end of town, as he who preferr'd his honesty to his interest at the other.

As you weaken the moral inhibitions of Christian belief on human nature,

Consider what people mean when they speak of morality. Generally, it is adherence to a code of behavior which can be a civil or a religious code, although it is more likely to be religious. In other words, it is inherited.

The Tea Totalitarians use morality as a buzz word to support whatever it is they think they are supporting. There was a rather interesting article on them in the 25 March 2010 New York Review of Books, written by someone who attended their Tennessee convention. Apparently, fissures are developing within their movement, separating the generally non-religious Libertarians from the Christian Right, over the matter of prayer, the Bible and references to Jesus.

The author of the story feels there is a strong element of racism in the Tea Totalitarians.

Now, the Bible and basic Christian morality can be used to support racism, even slavery. It always has been. A truly ethical person would not be racist.

Quote:

If the only thing keeping you from murdering, raping, and thieving is a belief in a god, then you are dangerous and morally fragile.

That's a really silly thing to say TK. Even a cursory study of human nature in its historical aspects makes it quite obvious that murdering, raping and thieving is at its very core.

Even in the Christian world it has something of a shameful past, and present indeed, but it is only in a Christian world that you could say a thing as that and not be laughed at.

You can only mean "dangerous and morally fragile" from a Christian point of view.

Murdering people, carrying off their daughters and taking over their lands looks to be how we actually are and how we would be with no belief in a Christian God.

No moral system can withstand human conduct. It is your obvious general acceptance of the Christian moral system that caused you to write such a sentence.

I suspect that you are picking and choosing which aspects of the Christian moral system to accept. We can all, I think, accept its teachings against murdering, raping and thieving so they are not in dispute although I understand why you homed in on them. It was to get the strength of Christian morality into your sails.

Some might say, and not a few, that abortion is murder and what is more the murder of the most defenceless form of human life within its protective mother. But I guess that is not your view. It is one of those aspects of Christian morality you don't accept. I daresay there are others and I daresay your objections suit your purposes.

And you are lucky enough to live in an age where you are not branded as a heretic. Calling into question the moral system on which you based your expostulation of righteous indignation. A ridiculous heretic.

Quote:

As you weaken the moral inhibitions of Christian belief on human nature,

LOL you got to be kidding me!!!!!!!!!!!

Christians believes had result in one hell of a lot of blood shred it surely had no history of any kind of inhibitions killings, torture and no that is not in the long dead past as it is happening at this very moment in areas of the world.

Killing in the name of Jesus in no more new then lying in his name as you seem be doing.