MagiDragon Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1306982489' post='2249037'] Even if they had a fail rate of 80% it's still better than 100% (as it would be in this context if condoms are not used). Just to be sure, what exactly are you defending? The non use of condoms in general or just within marriages? [/quote] You do realize that Catholicism teaches that condom use is immoral, don't you? It's for the same reasons that homosexuality is wrong. (Although most forms of Protestantism have trouble putting 2 and 2 together like this: they think homosexuality is wrong, but contraception is OK.) [quote name='xSilverPhinx'] Also, if you want compare the number of viral molecules that can get through the fabric and the number contained in semen, just to let you know, semen has a much higher chance of actually infecting (as in causing an autoimmune response) than a few viruses which might not even be enough to be detected in blood tests. Even between married monogamous couples, if one or both are HIV positive, they should still use condoms because one characteristic of the AIDS virus is that it mutates frequently (there are many types in the HIV "family") so someone with one type can still get infected with a more aggressive strain. [/quote] I'm saying that condom use is pretty much never good. For it to be acceptable, you *really* have to come up with bizarre scenarios. (Look at what Pope Benedict said several months ago, and how convoluted his statement was!) Are you saying that playing Russian Roulette with your spouse's life/health is morally acceptable so long as you try to make sure that there's as few bullets in the gun as possible, and you have fun doing it? Or maybe, "risking a person's life is justified so long as I don't risk their life any more than necessary for me to enjoy it"? Marriage is not a license for a physical relationship, it is a protection for the children of that union. For your other conversations, I would recommend that you subscribe to the Austro-Libertarian "Non Aggression Principle." It is at least an internally consistent philosophy, even if it does fail to protect you from arguments about *why* it's immoral to initiate aggression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307031207' post='2249188'] I would say that the statement "there is a god who encourages people to kill unbelievers" is [b]objectively wrong[/b], without being proven that such a god exists in fact exists first. So that would be wrong, because killing is only valid as a last resort [b]in my opinion[/b]. Simply saying that there is an objective morality but then postulating what that is does not stand on valid ground. [/quote] Your opinion is not objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1306997527' post='2249106'] But yes pretty much without objective truth, there is no truth and only opinion. Everyone's opinions are equal, a opinion is a opinion. "I'm ok, you're ok" relativism. [/quote] Yes, I absolutely agree, everyone is entitled to an opinion and opinions often differ. Within a democracy we take our individual opinions and vote for a party that we feel best represents us as an individual person. After the vote, we then live by the rules governing our society, whether we agree with all of them or not [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1306997527' post='2249106'] Which is the case if man has no soul. Without a soul man is just a mere animal. [/quote] Absolutely, people have no soul and people are animals. I am an atheist and this is the consequence of lacking a belief in gods. China, Russia etc didn't really care about Atheism, but they saw religious organisations as competition for control on people that's why they got rid of them. [quote name='MagiDragon' timestamp='1307038370' post='2249230'] You do realize that Catholicism teaches that condom use is immoral, don't you? It's for the same reasons that homosexuality is wrong. (Although most forms of Protestantism have trouble putting 2 and 2 together like this: they think homosexuality is wrong, but contraception is OK.) [/quote] In my personal atheist opinion, condoms are a good thing and homosexuality is good for people that are that way inclinded. Both include people that are consentual and are using their free will. There are no victims and no harm being done. It is all good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307041748' post='2249245'] Absolutely, people have no soul and people are animals. I am an atheist and this is the consequence of lacking a belief in gods. China, Russia etc didn't really care about Atheism, but they saw religious organisations as competition for control on people that's why they got rid of them. [/quote] I honestly never have understood this perspective, to me it makes absolutely no sense [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307041748' post='2249245'] Absolutely, people have no soul and people are animals. I am an atheist and this is the consequence of lacking a belief in gods. China, Russia etc didn't really care about Atheism, but they saw religious organisations as competition for control on people that's why they got rid of them. [/quote] Yeah... they didn't care about Atheism so much, they declare by fiat, by matter of law that the government was to be officially atheist, and made atheism the official propaganda of the state. They saw religion as a form of collective insanity, not just competition for power. They appointed themselves as 'servants' to rid the world of that collective insanity, to reign in the new enlighten age of atheism. Like it or not they thought themselves atheists, and they were atheists and they thought their policies to be the product and natural conclusion of atheism. Without objective truth their opinion of what atheism is is no more right or wrong than yours. Deal with it and come to terms with that reality. Edited June 2, 2011 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307041748' post='2249245'] In my personal atheist opinion, condoms are a good thing and homosexuality is good for people that are that way inclinded. Both include people that are consentual and are using their free will. There are no victims and no harm being done. It is all good. [/quote] I am glad that you admit it is your opinion, and therefore could very well be as wrong as it could be right. Or in fact it would be neither because "wrong" and "right" technically do not exist, they are created according to a secular worldview. Edited June 2, 2011 by HisChildForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307041748' post='2249245'] Yes, I absolutely agree, everyone is entitled to an opinion and opinions often differ. Within a democracy we take our individual opinions and vote for a party that we feel best represents us as an individual person. After the vote, we then live by the rules governing our society, whether we agree with all of them or not[/quote] There's no reason though why any must actually be bound to obey society. [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307041748' post='2249245']Absolutely, people have no soul and people are animals. I am an atheist and this is the consequence of lacking a belief in gods. China, Russia etc didn't really care about Atheism, but they saw religious organisations as competition for control on people that's why they got rid of them. [/quote] Also if you are going to admit that man is an animal, are you against murder? Are you willing to admit that without objective truth that since man is in your opinion just an animal that 'murder' in one society is not murder in another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1307041898' post='2249248'] I honestly never have understood this perspective, to me it makes absolutely no sense [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img] [/quote] Because it defies logic and reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1307041898' post='2249248'] I honestly never have understood this perspective, to me it makes absolutely no sense [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img] [/quote] Which part didn't you understand Amppax, I am happy to elaborate, I don't expect you to agree but I am sure I can clarify this better. [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307043176' post='2249257'] ...and made atheism the official propaganda of the state.[/quote] The only "message" behind atheism is "lack of belief in gods" Are they sending out messages that there are god theories, none with physical proof so we all ought to reserve judgment and not jump onto a belief???? Atheism isn't even "evangelistic" by this I mean it doesn't encourage people to spread the word and convert others. It is a personal lack of belief, a personal standpoint. [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307043473' post='2249262'] There's no reason though why any must actually be bound to obey society. [/quote] Most societies implement consequences for those that don't obey the rules [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307043473' post='2249262'] Also if you are going to admit that man is an animal, are you against murder? Are you willing to admit that without objective truth that since man is in your opinion just an animal that 'murder' in one society is not murder in another? [/quote] I'm not so black and white about murder. I certainly don't take it to the degree that Catholics do. I'm for abortions in certain cases, I'm for Euthanasia, I'm for the death penalty. Being a fellow human myself, I do have a special affinity towards humans. Note: you don't often find lions hunt and kill other lions. Edited June 2, 2011 by stevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 Can anyone define what objective morality is? 1. What is it? 2. Who is the authority? 3. How do people know what the objective morals are? As an atheist I do not have a definition of this concept. If you want an open and honest debate about this, we need to be clear with regards to what it is that we are debating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044656' post='2249274'] Can anyone define what objective morality is? 1. What is it? 2. Who is the authority? 3. How do people know what the objective morals are? As an atheist I do not have a definition of this concept. If you want an open and honest debate about this, we need to be clear with regards to what it is that we are debating. [/quote] this might be something that you should start a new thread about, as we are seriously derailing Silverphin's thread. Edited June 2, 2011 by Amppax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisChildForever Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044486' post='2249273'] Note: you don't often find lions hunt and kill other lions. [/quote] You've never seen [i]Big Cat Diary[/i], have you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044486' post='2249273'] The only "message" behind atheism is "lack of belief in gods" Are they sending out messages that there are god theories, none with physical proof so we all ought to reserve judgment and not jump onto a belief???? Atheism is even "evangelistic" by this I mean it doesn't encourage people to spread the word and convert others. It is a personal lack of belief, a personal standpoint.[/quote] You err in believing there is only one form of atheism, there is negative atheism which is the simple belief that no gods exists, and then there is another form of atheism which is a doctrine of positive denial that defies theism. Without objective truth you cannot say one form of atheism is more true or false than the other. [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044486' post='2249273']Most societies implement consequences for those that don't obey the rules[/quote] So what? Society be d##ned. What if society is weak to stop the criminal? And what then when society itself says the killing' of a certain classes of persons is permissible? A quick look at history will tell us it has happened many times before. If society determines right and wrong. Then when society allows the murder of Jews or what ever group of people it is completely just, true and right for that society. [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044486' post='2249273']I'm not so black and white about murder. I certainly don't take it to the degree that Catholics do. I'm for abortions in certain cases, I'm for Euthanasia, I'm for the death penalty. Being a fellow human myself, I do have a special affinity towards humans. [/quote] Speaking of black and white, there was a time in the United States that black men were not considered to be persons under the law. They could legally be bought, sold and killed like animals. Now you may be personally against slavery and lynching but for the society at the time how do you, or can you, argue that it was objectively wrong when you deny objective truth? Of course that question is rhetorical, sure you can be personally against it. But you cannot say it was wrong for the society at the time to employ slavery and lynching. [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307044486' post='2249273']Note: you don't often find lions hunt and kill other lions. [/quote] But it is found and it is not immoral because they are animals, its just an act of nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevil Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307045683' post='2249278'] You err in believing there is only one form of atheism, there is negative atheism which is the simple belief that no gods exists, and then there is another form of atheism which is a doctrine of positive denial that defies theism. Without objective truth you cannot say one form of atheism is more true or false than the other. [/quote] I disagree, atheism is a personal lack of belief in gods. Anything beyond that isn't atheism. Atheism has no teachings, no scripture, no moral code book, no prescribed way of life. Sure some atheists are anti theists, just like some Catholics are pro gun control. Anti theist is not a form of atheism, it might be the case that all anti theists are also atheists, but that doesn't mean that anti theist is a form of atheism. Anti theist is different. [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1307045683' post='2249278'] But it is found and it is not immoral because they are animals, its just an act of nature. [/quote] I don't agree with the concept of moral and immoral. I don't judge and label people or actions to be immoral. I don't support anarchy, and I don't support doing what I would deem as nasty and horrible things to any animal (humans included) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted June 2, 2011 Share Posted June 2, 2011 (edited) [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307046421' post='2249288'] I disagree, atheism is a personal lack of belief in gods. Anything beyond that isn't atheism. Atheism has no teachings, no scripture, no moral code book, no prescribed way of life. Sure some atheists are anti theists, just like some Catholics are pro gun control. Anti theist is not a form of atheism, it might be the case that all anti theists are also atheists, but that doesn't mean that anti theist is a form of atheism. Anti theist is different.[/quote] Again your just giving your opinion, and just describing one form of atheism know as negative atheism. Yes positive Atheism is anti-theist but it's still a form of atheism because it denies the existence of any gods. Labeling positive atheism as just anti-theist is a lame cop-out, in a lame attempt to shrug off the sick crimes committed by atheists. But in any event your understanding of what atheism is or is not is just your opinion. The Communists of the USSR and others believe(d) whole heartily their program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism. [quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307046421' post='2249288']I don't agree with the concept of moral and immoral. I don't judge and label people or actions to be immoral. I don't support anarchy, and I don't support doing what I would deem as nasty and horrible things to any animal (humans included) [/quote] So you admit the would be reality that would be if objective truth does not exist that it is not immoral for the societies to enslave and allow murder of unwanted groups of people? Edited June 2, 2011 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now