The Objective Morality Debate

[kujo]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307834216' post='2252501']
its not worth it to argue with a someone who is catholic but does not agree with the church and opposes church teaching. all that will happen is that i will say your not following church teaching and your going against what the church teaches. you'll claim otherwise or claim that your not technically against church teaching. it will degrade into an arguement that will go no where. you are obviously not ready to accept ALL that the catholic church teaches. hopefully in time you will, for your own sake. although to many times on these boards any arguement degrades into a catholic who folllows all church teaches and a catholic who does not follow all church teachings arguement. then judging comes out from both sides and so does being sarcastic and rude. things that are not good for either involved. so that is not worth it. arguing with an athiest makes sense since they have their own beliefs. arguing with a catholic who does not hold all the catholic beliefs does not make sense. to me, being a catholic is all or nothing.
[/quote]

I've made a sincere effort not to be sarcastic OR rude, despite my natural inclination to be both. I feel I have been straight-forward and respectful, while still calling into question some of your arguments; however, if you are unwilling or unable to extend me the same courtesies, or to answer those questions, that is fine by me.

And you're right--I am [i]not[/i] ready to accept "ALL that the Catholic Church teaches." I have arrived at my opinions honestly and without a desire for personal gain. I truly am only thinking of others when I discuss these things, for, again, I abide by these Church teachings we have been debating since, again, I agree with them for me. So while I happen to believe in a sort of gradualism--one that rejects your characterization of Catholicism as an "all or nothing" ([i]see[/i]: zero-sum game) situation-- I appreciate and respect the beliefs of others and find it repugnant when anyone insinuates that having those beliefs somehow makes them a flawed individual. I believe that, with time, everyone lands on the same squares, so while some may believe they've got it made right now (when they're young), they might not/won't believe that 10, 15 or 20 years from now. God works on us throughout our lives, and I don't believe for a second that He thinks poorly of my concerns for helping others.

[stevil]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307802818' post='2252349']
the catholic church shows more compassion, tolerance and love than athiests ever could. you have children right? is it loving to correct them when they are in error? when your child does something against your rules, do you correct them?
[/quote]
I do not shame them in public, I do not teach their neighbors, their relatives, their friends, their community that my kids are evil sinners and doing unnatural things. I do not turn the world against them. I give my children love and respect. when they grow up I will stop parenting them and will simply provide support and understanding. Of course if they activily come to me seeking help, I will help, but as adults I will not tell them what they should or shouldn't do. If there is a god then it is upto god to judge, not me.

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307802818' post='2252349']
its no different than what the catholic church does. we try to correct "BEHAVIOR" that is wrong. being attracted to the same sex is not a sin. so being homosexual is not a sin. homosexual acts are a sin. having sex with the same sex person i a sin. the catholic church tries compassionatly to teach people why homosexual acts are wrong.
[/quote]
No, not compassionatly. I would call the approach more of a shame and public denounciation, an ostracising and ridiculing.

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307802818' post='2252349']
The catholic church does this because they LOVE all people and want all people to get the eternal reward in heaven.[/quote]
Thus we have a problem, not all people believe that the catholic path is the path to heaven, not all people believe in heaven.
In my view it is best to respect people and their decisions, if no-one else in society is being hurt then simply let people be.
Why doesn't the church teach people this. Why don't they tell people to try and be the best you can be but don't judge others.

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307906457' post='2252808']
Thus we have a problem, not all people believe that the catholic path is the path to heaven, not all people believe in heaven.
In my view it is best to respect people and their decisions, if no-one else in society is being hurt then simply let people be.
Why doesn't the church teach people this. Why don't they tell people to try and be the best you can be but don't judge others.
[/quote]


i find this laughable from an athiest. why don't athiest take your advice. why do athiest try to change all the laws so its in accordance with their beliefs? i mean is anyone really being hurt because the back of the dollar bill says "In God we trust"? is anyone being hurt by having a morning prayer in scholl with morning announcements? is anyone hurt when God is brought up in relation to american government?

athiests always say they want people of religion to leave everyone else alone when it comes to their beliefs but they are more than happy to push their beliefs on everyone else. so why the double standard in your post? why are athiests not expected to do all the things you listed above? why do athiests get a different set of rules?

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307940576' post='2253054']
i find this laughable from an athiest. why don't athiest take your advice. why do athiest try to change all the laws so its in accordance with their beliefs? i mean is anyone really being hurt because the back of the dollar bill says "In God we trust"? is anyone being hurt by having a morning prayer in scholl with morning announcements? is anyone hurt when God is brought up in relation to american government?

athiests always say they want people of religion to leave everyone else alone when it comes to their beliefs but they are more than happy to push their beliefs on everyone else. so why the double standard in your post? why are athiests not expected to do all the things you listed above? why do athiests get a different set of rules?
[/quote]

Not me personally, but you can't compare those with the persecution of individuals and trampling on individual rights which influence lives in more ways than simply cause some to feel offended.

Also, the idea behind secularism is that no religion is prioritised over another, so a Hindu for instance could feel what some of the more outspoken atheists feel on the issues you listed without being an atheist.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9To30Hz7A[/media]

Edited June 13, 2011 by xSilverPhinx

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307942005' post='2253060']
Also, the idea behind secularism is that no religion is prioritised over another, so a Hindu for instance could feel what some of the more outspoken atheists feel on the issues you listed without being an atheist.
[/quote]

I'm gonna go ahead and say that's a bunch of the essence of cow. I would say the idea behind secularism is to push religion entirely out of the public realm unless it's some watered-down syncretism that doesn't pose an ideological threat to the prevailing philosophy at that time, to which I say: good luck with that

But it would be really interesting to have this thread split or for someone to start a new thread/s about the effectiveness of certain methods of sex education and the objective morality behind euthanasia/assisted suicide just for organization's sake. Or maybe I'm the only one who's getting a little confused, in which case continue . . .

[stevil]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307940576' post='2253054']
i find this laughable from an athiest. why don't athiest take your advice. why do athiest try to change all the laws so its in accordance with their beliefs? i mean is anyone really being hurt because the back of the dollar bill says "In God we trust"? is anyone being hurt by having a morning prayer in scholl with morning announcements? is anyone hurt when God is brought up in relation to american government?

athiests always say they want people of religion to leave everyone else alone when it comes to their beliefs but they are more than happy to push their beliefs on everyone else. so why the double standard in your post? why are athiests not expected to do all the things you listed above? why do athiests get a different set of rules?
[/quote]
I'm consistent in my message of acceptance and tolerance, of equal opportunity and respect. I am for inclusiveness, not exclusiveness. these are thing that I am for. Although atheists do not have to be for these things, they also do not have to be against these things, we are a very diverse bunch after all.

A Christian based morning prayer in school is exclusive to Christians and somewhat disrespectful for non Christians. I know that Christains would be up in arms if a school all of a sudden enforced Islamic prayer in the morning at school. i know this because some Catholics on this forum are even afraid of Yoga chants.

There is nothing wrong with organising prayer for those that want to pray as a group, but there is a time and a place. To do it at assembly when everyone must be present, even the non Christians, well, this is disrespectful. For other theists it would be blasphemy of sorts. Can you not grasp that is bad to enforce things on people yet good to give people choice. Think of it as Free Will which Christians believe their god wants people to have.

When Atheists try to change law it is for inclusivity and choice, when Christians try to change law it is for exclusivity and a single minded, single approach to doing things, the Christian way or the Christian way.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1307947892' post='2253072']
I'm gonna go ahead and say that's a bunch of the essence of cow. I would say the idea behind secularism is to push religion entirely out of the public realm unless it's some watered-down syncretism that doesn't pose an ideological threat to the prevailing philosophy at that time, to which I say: good luck with that
[/quote]

And which religion would that be, exactly?

I think that a lot of it is, if a religion wants to be respected, then respecting others (including atheists) is a good place to start.

The battles that you see as secularism fighting for space in the public realm do sometimes go into the rather extreme and unnecessary, but that's just the way it is. Sometimes you have to go from black to white so you can get to grey. The dominant group is not going to give up their priviledged position (as you pointed out yourself) so easily.

Edited June 13, 2011 by xSilverPhinx

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1307947892' post='2253072']
I would say the idea behind secularism is to push religion entirely out of the public realm.
[/quote]
The idea behind secularism is not so much focused on religion but more focused on equality, accepting that a society is made up of many people from differing backgrounds with different beliefs and cultures. Secularism is about recognizing that and adjusting to make everyone welcome and feel like an equal member of society.

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307948366' post='2253073']
I'm consistent in my message of acceptance and tolerance, of equal opportunity and respect. I am for inclusiveness, not exclusiveness. these are thing that I am for. Although atheists do not have to be for these things, they also do not have to be against these things, we are a very diverse bunch after all.

A Christian based morning prayer in school is exclusive to Christians and somewhat disrespectful for non Christians. I know that Christains would be up in arms if a school all of a sudden enforced Islamic prayer in the morning at school. i know this because some Catholics on this forum are even afraid of Yoga chants.

There is nothing wrong with organising prayer for those that want to pray as a group, but there is a time and a place. To do it at assembly when everyone must be present, even the non Christians, well, this is disrespectful. For other theists it would be blasphemy of sorts. Can you not grasp that is bad to enforce things on people yet good to give people choice. Think of it as Free Will which Christians believe their god wants people to have.

When Atheists try to change law it is for inclusivity and choice, when Christians try to change law it is for exclusivity and a single minded, single approach to doing things, the Christian way or the Christian way.
[/quote]


when did i ever say anything about a christian prayer. you can have prayer be all inclusive.

athiests try to change the law so it excludes evertyone but their beliefs. the dollar bill has been saying in God we trust for how long? yet athiests try to remove it. they try to change the laws to exclude anyone who believes in God and anyone who values american history. although you'll probobly tell me that having in God we trust of the back of a dollar bill disrespectful and hurts athiests, so we should channge. which proves my point exactly. athiests try to change laws to fit them and no one else.

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307953601' post='2253079']
The idea behind secularism is not so much focused on religion but more focused on equality, accepting that a society is made up of many people from differing backgrounds with different beliefs and cultures. Secularism is about recognizing that and adjusting to make everyone welcome and feel like an equal member of society.
[/quote]


i call this statement laughable. if every religion was given equal time and respect in america seculiists would still be up in arms. they want religion, any and all religion removed from the people and replaced with secular humanism(which is a religion, no matter what they say). they want to appear all inclusive but in reality they want to be exclusive and only allow their religion in.

[kujo]

Does the "secular movement" have a platform? It might be helpful since it seems like there's a gigantic dispute between what our atheists are calling secularism and what the Catholics on this board believe to be secularism.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307973639' post='2253130']
athiests try to change the law so it excludes evertyone but their beliefs. the dollar bill has been saying in God we trust for how long? yet athiests try to remove it. they try to change the laws to exclude anyone who believes in God and anyone who values american history. although you'll probobly tell me that having in God we trust of the back of a dollar bill disrespectful and hurts athiests, so we should channge. which proves my point exactly. athiests try to change laws to fit them and no one else.
[/quote]

In the case of the States, the story goes that some are trying to go back to what the founding fathers thought of religion and its interference in government. Contrary to what many seem to believe, it wasn't a nation founded on Christian beliefs.

I just noticed that the words "god be praised" are printed on Brazilian notes...


[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307973791' post='2253132']
i call this statement laughable. if every religion was given equal time and respect in america seculiists would still be up in arms. they want religion, any and all religion removed from the people and replaced with secular humanism(which is a religion, no matter what they say). they want to appear all inclusive but in reality they want to be exclusive and only allow their religion in.
[/quote]

Nonsense, religious people can also be secularists. Secularism is just a system which means separation of government and religion, not a religion in itself.

You want a theocracy? That almost always means that many groups will be ostracised and persecuted for their differing beliefs.

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1307974251' post='2253135']
Does the "secular movement" have a platform? It might be helpful since it seems like there's a gigantic dispute between what our atheists are calling secularism and what the Catholics on this board believe to be secularism.
[/quote]

It doesn't mean the eradication of religion as havok seems to think. Basically it's the separation of Churches/religious institutions and government, which can be tricky. It also means freedom from religion and of religion, which can also blur into extremism when the interests of large groups of people are pitted against individuals and smaller groups. How do you go about determining what infringes less on the rights of the least favoured group in that case?

It also works the other way round of course, which means keeping government out of people's and community's private religious matters.

"Then give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism#cite_note-15"] [/url]

I think that a lot of atheists take out their frustration on things in ways that I would consider to be extremism and unnecessary. Trying to keep people from wearing a cross around their own necks or choosing a cross as the tombstone of a loved one are a bit out there, IMO, because those don't really infringe on the rights of atheists and other non Christian theistic groups. There's a lot of frustration and little good sense in cases such as those.

Speaking for myself, I don't care if there are religious words written on money (though that is not secularist) or if people pray in school, I just ignore them. I just think that religion and religious interests should be kept out of national decisions which affect everybody, not just those who believe in gods.

Secularism is only a real problem for groups who think that their way should prevail over others, it's not a problem for religion.

Edited June 13, 2011 by xSilverPhinx

[kujo]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307985817' post='2253208']
You want a theocracy? That almost always means that many groups will be ostracised and persecuted for their differing beliefs.
[/quote]

Those are ostracized because their beliefs are wrong. And they [i]choose[/i] to be wrong. They don't have to be...they could just believe what Catholics believe, and then they wouldn't be ostracized.

Edited June 13, 2011 by kujo

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1307986764' post='2253219']
Those are ostracized because their beliefs are wrong. And they [i]choose[/i] to be wrong. They don't have to be...they could just believe what Catholics believe, and then they wouldn't be ostracized.
[/quote]

That's what every exclusionist religious group says...but why should it be Catholicism in the front seat? Why not some Protestant denomination?

(I'm just not very good at picking up satire or sarcasm when speaking about religion and religious beliefs...was your comment meant to be sarcastic? )