The Objective Morality Debate

[kujo]

[quote name='xSilverPhinx' timestamp='1307987651' post='2253232']

(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? )
[/quote]

[stevil]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1307973639' post='2253130']
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.
[/quote]
If its all inclusive then where are the incense sticks, the bell to gong, the prayer mats facing Mecca, the muslim prayer chants, What about the Atheists what the hell are they supposed to do, twiddle their thumbs?
Why can't the Christains organise themselves to meet up 10 minutes earlier and huddle together on their own and pray to their god as a collective, it very much seems to me that the Christians want non Christians there as if they feel non Christians might want to join in and all of a sudden become Christians. Christianity has this huge desire to evangalise you know.

The American dollar has been saying "In God we trust" for way too long, maybe it is time that it says "praise be Allah", or "there is no power greater than money"
Please explain why money should have the word "God" on it. If you want to read about god then wouldn't the bible be a great source instead? or is this simpley another feable attempt to evangalise, to get teh name "God" into the hands of non Christians.
I would think it as degrading if I worshiped something and they put its name on money. May as well write it on toilet paper, at least toilet paper does not corrupt people.
For a countries official currency it should represent the nation, the nation of all peoples, all religions or lack of. Only Christians use the term "God", I say remove it from the nation's currency.

Edited June 13, 2011 by stevil

[stevil]

[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]
A secular democratic nation does not call to make religion illegal, they do not call to make scripture illegal, they do not tear down buildings of worship, they do not obolish religion affiliated private schools.
I really don't know what it is that you are going on about. There is no such thing as a secular person, being a humanist has no reflection on a person's religion. Your arguement is extremely weak.

Edited June 13, 2011 by stevil

[kujo]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307992985' post='2253266']
Your arguement is extremely weak.
[/quote]

I pointed out the same thing over the course of the last several pages. Don't expose the fallacies in her arguments, though, because that doesn't seem to be where her strengths lie. She's much better at incorrectly parroting the more effusive and erudite arguments that others on here have made before. It's like a child having an argument with another child over fiscal policy, where the words coming out of their mouths are like a Mad Lib of the conversations they've heard their parents having at the dinner table.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307992985' post='2253266']
A secular democratic nation does not call to make religion illegal, they do not call to make scripture illegal, they do not tear down buildings of worship, they do not obolish religion affiliated private schools.
I really don't know what it is that you are going on about. There is no such thing as a secular person, being a humanist has no reflection on a person's religion. Your arguement is extremely weak.
[/quote]

Her point is of course is [i]extremely[/i] obvious is that secularists (people who exist, that embrace secularism) want to use secularism to abolish any mention of God/religion in any and all public places.

Humanist is not a reflection on the person's religion? Being a Humanist does effect the persons religion or their religion is effected by Humanism. At least according to Wikipedia.

[spoiler]In the 20th century and 21st century, members of Humanist organizations
disagree as to whether Humanism is a religion. They categorize
themselves in one of three ways. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_humanism"]Religious humanists[/url],
in the tradition of the earliest Humanist organizations in the UK and
US, saw Humanism as fulfilling the traditional social role of religion.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism#cite_note-47"][48][/url][/sup] [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_Humanism"]Secular Humanists[/url] consider all forms of religion, including religious Humanism, to be superseded.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism#cite_note-48"][49][/url][/sup] In order to sidestep disagreements between these two factions recent Humanist proclamations define Humanism as a [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_stance#Humanism"]life stance[/url];
proponents of this view making up the third faction. Regardless of
implementation, the philosophy of all three groups rejects deference to
supernatural beliefs and addresses ethics without reference to them
recognizing ethics as a human enterprise. It is generally compatible
with [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism"]atheism[/url] [sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism#cite_note-49"][50][/url][/sup] and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism"]agnosticism[/url],[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism#cite_note-50"][51][/url][/sup] but being atheist or agnostic does not make one a Humanist.[sup][url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism#cite_note-51"][52][/url][/sup] [/spoiler]

Edited June 13, 2011 by KnightofChrist

[KnightofChrist]

[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]

Yes they do have a platform, take God and any mention of God out of the public place.


[url="http://www.secular.org/content/press-releases/in-god-we-trust-resolution-protested"]Example, one of many.[/url]

[xSilverPhinx]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307992646' post='2253264']
If its all inclusive then where are the incense sticks, the bell to gong, the prayer mats facing Mecca, the muslim prayer chants, What about the Atheists what the hell are they supposed to do, twiddle their thumbs?
Why can't the Christains organise themselves to meet up 10 minutes earlier and huddle together on their own and pray to their god as a collective, it very much seems to me that the Christians want non Christians there as if they feel non Christians might want to join in and all of a sudden become Christians. Christianity has this huge desire to evangalise you know.

The American dollar has been saying "In God we trust" for way too long, maybe it is time that it says "praise be Allah", or "there is no power greater than money"
Please explain why money should have the word "God" on it. If you want to read about god then wouldn't the bible be a great source instead? or is this simpley another feable attempt to evangalise, to get teh name "God" into the hands of non Christians.
I would think it as degrading if I worshiped something and they put its name on money. May as well write it on toilet paper, at least toilet paper does not corrupt people.
For a countries official currency it should represent the nation, the nation of all peoples, all religions or lack of. Only Christians use the term "God", I say remove it from the nation's currency.
[/quote]

I think it's actually sort of amusing...makes it look like money needs a good luck charm written on it. I mean, why on money?

[stevil]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1307995931' post='2253279']
I pointed out the same thing over the course of the last several pages. Don't expose the fallacies in her arguments, though, because that doesn't seem to be where her strengths lie. She's much better at incorrectly parroting the more effusive and erudite arguments that others on here have made before. It's like a child having an argument with another child over fiscal policy, where the words coming out of their mouths are like a Mad Lib of the conversations they've heard their parents having at the dinner table.
[/quote]
Yes you did, much appreciated kujo.

I'm here on this forum to learn about Catholics and Christians, I have many Christians in my community and want to get a better understanding on what it means for them to have this kind of faith. Hopefully this will give me a much better bearing for when I interact with them. With this regards the topic of this discussion (argument) is not as important as my learning about the way these Catholics approach such discussions and how they express their reasoning and how they present themselves.

I am learning much, although I must say that not all is good.
I know I have some preconceptions and I am hoping to either substantiate or break these preconceptions, either way I am looking for some answers.

My preconception with regards to Catholics having to align their thoughts with that of the Church seems to be true.
My preconception with regards to Catholicism being sexist (e.g. not allowing female priests) is true. Although I now know how Catholics internally justify such a position.
My preconception with regards to the integrity of Catholics seems to be false. I gather from the recent arguments of this thread that not all Catholics operate with personal integrity, I would call much of what has been posted as intentional dishonest discourse. Although kujo, I have found that you have acted with much honesty and integrity.
I like that you are able to separate state from church and that you look inwards rather than expecting that everyone else should think like you and be Catholic.
I am also intrigued to see the personal attacks that people here are making on you for not thinking exactly like them. It seems to me that Catholicism is not about being supportive, understanding and tolerant. There also seems to be a high level of arrogance with regards to some Catholics here. They believe that they are right, their church is right and everyone else is wrong. They don't invest time in getting to know other religions or non religions, they aren't interested in understanding others, they won't listen, they seem to want to teach and not learn. But this is some people here, not all.

Edited June 14, 2011 by stevil

[kujo]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1308029972' post='2253500']
Yes you did, much appreciated kujo.

I'm here on this forum to learn about Catholics and Christians, I have many Christians in my community and want to get a better understanding on what it means for them to have this kind of faith. Hopefully this will give me a much better bearing for when I interact with them. With this regards the topic of this discussion (argument) is not as important as my learning about the way these Catholics approach such discussions and how they express their reasoning and how they present themselves.

I am learning much, although I must say that not all is good.
I know I have some preconceptions and I am hoping to either substantiate or break these preconceptions, either way I am looking for some answers.

My preconception with regards to Catholics having to align their thoughts with that of the Church seems to be true.
My preconception with regards to Catholicism being sexist (e.g. not allowing female priests) is true. Although I now know how Catholics internally justify such a position.
My preconception with regards to the integrity of Catholics seems to be false. I gather from the recent arguments of this thread that not all Catholics operate with personal integrity, I would call much of what has been posted as intentional dishonest discourse. Although kujo, I have found that you have acted with much honesty and integrity.
I like that you are able to separate state from church and that you look inwards rather than expecting that everyone else should think like you and be Catholic.
I am also intrigued to see the personal attacks that people here are making on you for not thinking exactly like them. It seems to me that Catholicism is not about being supportive, understanding and tolerant. There also seems to be a high level of arrogance with regards to some Catholics here. They believe that they are right, their church is right and everyone else is wrong. They don't invest time in getting to know other religions or non religions, they aren't interested in understanding others, they won't listen, they seem to want to teach and not learn. But this is some people here, not all.
[/quote]

While I certainly appreciate your kind words, I must attempt to disabuse you of the belief that Catholics are sexist. Simply saying that there are roles that must be filled by a certain gender does NOT make one a sexist. For, while women are not meant to be priests, men are equally not meant to be nuns. One role is not any more or less important than the other--go to a parish and see how vital the religious sisters that work there are. Often times they are in charge of the school, the parish office administration, the elderly care facilities and/or the youth ministry/religious instruction. With my parish, it was both the elderly care facility that we had on-site (one of the largest in the town) as well as the K-8 school. The religious sisters were VITAL to the success of both. And while they still answered to the pastor at our parish, they earned a large degree of autonomy through their results.

Catholics believe that man and women are separate entities, each with intrinsic value that is wholly equal and wholly different. That is not sexist at all, for neither is better or worse than the other. They're just different.

[havok579257]

[quote name='kujo' timestamp='1307995931' post='2253279']
I pointed out the same thing over the course of the last several pages. Don't expose the fallacies in her arguments, though, because that doesn't seem to be where her strengths lie. She's much better at incorrectly parroting the more effusive and erudite arguments that others on here have made before. It's like a child having an argument with another child over fiscal policy, where the words coming out of their mouths are like a Mad Lib of the conversations they've heard their parents having at the dinner table.
[/quote]


are you honestly trying to insult me by calling me a she when i am a he? are really serious? i take offense that your mocking me and my gender by calling me a she when i am a he.

your post here proves my point. it comes down to insults. thanks for proving my point.

[kujo]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1308057102' post='2253557']
are you honestly trying to insult me by calling me a she when i am a he? are really serious? i take offense that your mocking me and my gender by calling me a she when i am a he.

your post here proves my point. it comes down to insults. thanks for proving my point.
[/quote]

I actually thought you were a girl. Was not insulting you, just forgot who you were. I made a similar mistake in another thread when I referred to MissScripture as Missy, mistaking her for MissyP89. It's been a long time since I was on Phatmass and I have to apologize for forgetting others. For some reason I thought I remembered you being a girl from the Space Coast of Florida that I had met at a Steubie conference. I am really sorry.

[MIKolbe]

Kujo's a yankee fan, so his brain isn't that big to begin with...

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1307992646' post='2253264']
If its all inclusive then where are the incense sticks, the bell to gong, the prayer mats facing Mecca, the muslim prayer chants, What about the Atheists what the hell are they supposed to do, twiddle their thumbs?
Why can't the Christains organise themselves to meet up 10 minutes earlier and huddle together on their own and pray to their god as a collective, it very much seems to me that the Christians want non Christians there as if they feel non Christians might want to join in and all of a sudden become Christians. Christianity has this huge desire to evangalise you know.

The American dollar has been saying "In God we trust" for way too long, maybe it is time that it says "praise be Allah", or "there is no power greater than money"
Please explain why money should have the word "God" on it. If you want to read about god then wouldn't the bible be a great source instead? or is this simpley another feable attempt to evangalise, to get teh name "God" into the hands of non Christians.
I would think it as degrading if I worshiped something and they put its name on money. May as well write it on toilet paper, at least toilet paper does not corrupt people.
For a countries official currency it should represent the nation, the nation of all peoples, all religions or lack of. Only Christians use the term "God", I say remove it from the nation's currency.
[/quote]


this proves my point. athiests are not about making things all inclusive like you claim. they are all about pushing their beliefs on people. athiests try to change american history. they try to remove the word God from things so they can push thier beliefs on the american people. the words in God we trust is on the back of the dollar bill. it was put there before a lot of athiests were even born. although as typical with the athiests movement, they try to change things that are imbedded in american history so they can push their beliefs on everyone else. you prove my points that athiests are all about pushing their beliefs on the public. athiests try to say they are all about equality for all but that is a flat out lie. they are for their beliefs above everyone else's.

[havok579257]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1308029972' post='2253500']
Yes you did, much appreciated kujo.

I'm here on this forum to learn about Catholics and Christians, I have many Christians in my community and want to get a better understanding on what it means for them to have this kind of faith. Hopefully this will give me a much better bearing for when I interact with them. With this regards the topic of this discussion (argument) is not as important as my learning about the way these Catholics approach such discussions and how they express their reasoning and how they present themselves.

I am learning much, although I must say that not all is good.
I know I have some preconceptions and I am hoping to either substantiate or break these preconceptions, either way I am looking for some answers.

My preconception with regards to Catholics having to align their thoughts with that of the Church seems to be true.
My preconception with regards to Catholicism being sexist (e.g. not allowing female priests) is true. Although I now know how Catholics internally justify such a position.
My preconception with regards to the integrity of Catholics seems to be false. I gather from the recent arguments of this thread that not all Catholics operate with personal integrity, I would call much of what has been posted as intentional dishonest discourse. Although kujo, I have found that you have acted with much honesty and integrity.
I like that you are able to separate state from church and that you look inwards rather than expecting that everyone else should think like you and be Catholic.
I am also intrigued to see the personal attacks that people here are making on you for not thinking exactly like them. It seems to me that Catholicism is not about being supportive, understanding and tolerant. There also seems to be a high level of arrogance with regards to some Catholics here. They believe that they are right, their church is right and everyone else is wrong. They don't invest time in getting to know other religions or non religions, they aren't interested in understanding others, they won't listen, they seem to want to teach and not learn. But this is some people here, not all.
[/quote]


classic athiesm right here. when your arguements fail you resort to insults. you claim catholics are insulting yet you go on to insult catholics on these boards. thanks for bringing your typical athiest mindset to the phorums. your a shinning example of how athiests truley are. insulting, condesending and all about pushing their beliefs on others and are against equality.

[kujo]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1308058070' post='2253561']
this proves my point. athiests are not about making things all inclusive like you claim. they are all about pushing their beliefs on people. athiests try to change american history. they try to remove the word God from things so they can push thier beliefs on the american people. the words in God we trust is on the back of the dollar bill. it was put there before a lot of athiests were even born. although as typical with the athiests movement, they try to change things that are imbedded in american history so they can push their beliefs on everyone else. you prove my points that athiests are all about pushing their beliefs on the public. athiests try to say they are all about equality for all but that is a flat out lie. they are for their beliefs above everyone else's.
[/quote]

But isn't that kinda the whole point of any social or political agenda? Republicans want to "push" their beliefs on the public, as do the Democrats. Christians have a certain idea about what our world should look like, and work towards it every day, just like Muslims, Jews, Humanists, atheists, etc. That's kinda just part of being human--you think you're right and you want others to be right, too.