Catholic And Gay

[brianthephysicist]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323318175' post='2347181']
So far noone has pointed out any inconsistencies.
All Atheists think like me on this matter. None of us believe there are any objective morals.
[/quote]
Sorry, to be nitpicky, but not all atheists are moral relativists:

[url="http://www.atheistperspective.net/2011/04/atheism-is-moral-relativism.html"]http://www.atheistperspective.net/2011/04/atheism-is-moral-relativism.html[/url]

[quote]
Obviously atheism =/= moral relativism. Atheism has nothing to do with morality at all (atheism is the mere disbelief in deity/s). However, most atheists seem to be moral relativists, so this stereotype can be applied in most cases. But, not all atheists are moral relativists
[/quote]

[stevil]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1323319437' post='2347197']
I did (or you might have missed it, I guess):
[/quote]
"So in this case it is just (or at the very least, is not objectively unjust) to keep two same sex individuals from marrying. Am I incorrect?"

There is no objective just or objective unjust. My statements have been extremely consistent on this.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323322042' post='2347210']
"So in this case it is just (or at the very least, is not objectively unjust) to keep two same sex individuals from marrying. Am I incorrect?"

There is no objective just or objective unjust. My statements have been extremely consistent on this.
[/quote]
So then why is it wrong to keep two homosexuals from marrying?

[stevil]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' timestamp='1323322324' post='2347212']
So then why is it wrong to keep two homosexuals from marrying?
[/quote]
There is no objective right or objective wrong about it.
In my subjective opinion It is unnecessary for a government to impose a rule to restrict such a thing. I like people to have equal opportunity and to be free from discrimination. I think the opposite leads to conflict and war. But a lot of Christians think their all powerful god wants them to oppress gay people on his behalf. So we have opposing, subjective views on this matter. These Christians think that they are objectively right, but obviously I am unaware of this objective list of rights and wrongs otherwise how could I oppose an objective right?

Edited December 8, 2011 by stevil

[stevil]

[quote name='brianthephysicist' timestamp='1323319843' post='2347201']
Sorry, to be nitpicky, but not all atheists are moral relativists:

[url="http://www.atheistperspective.net/2011/04/atheism-is-moral-relativism.html"]http://www.atheistpe...relativism.html[/url]
[/quote]
It was an interesting read.
He certainly defines morality differently to what a Catholic would, and he doesn't subscribe to an objective morality.
"Morality, simply put, is behavior (can be in the form of cognition and physical action) that is beneficial to the functionality of society"
It seems to me, trying to judge whether actions are beneficial to society becomes very much subjective, especially if you don't have a book, or organisation to teach a common set of morals.

"While there are exceptions to actual acts (such as lying in certain situations), the foundation of morality is not relative with this view. While it may be difficult for an individual to assess how their/others behavior influences society as a whole, it cannot be denied that it does. It also cannot be denied that actions have consequences, and those consequence, while they appear to be the sole of cause of harm, have underlying factors that do not appear on the surface to be harmful in themselves (i.e. the underlying causal behaviors). This is why morality should be thought about in this way—it allows for a deeper understand of morality. This is the kind of morality atheists should subscribe to, not moral relativity"
This sounds very confused to me, I've never heard an atheist talk like this before. But anyway, I retract my previous statement, not all atheists disregard an objective set of morals. However this article that you have presented admits that most Atheists do disregard objective morals.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323318175' post='2347181']
So far noone has pointed out any inconsistencies.
All Atheists think like me on this matter. None of us believe there are any objective morals.
[/quote]

LOL. You're a fan of making broad claims that you can't possibly prove.

Kind of egotistical on your part to think the other hundreds of millions of atheists follow your logic.

[Papist]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323345021' post='2347242']

LOL. You're a fan of making broad claims that you can't possibly prove.

Kind of egotistical on your part to think the other hundreds of millions of atheists follow your logic.
[/quote]
It only needs to be true to him, since there is no objective truth. That is how he gets away with such statements.

[stevil]

[quote name='Papist' timestamp='1323354073' post='2347288']
It only needs to be true to him, since there is no objective truth. That is how he gets away with such statements.
[/quote]
I didn't see how a person whom does not believe in a god could believe in an objective set of morals. Where would the objective set of morals come from? In my opinion there are none, and in my opinion an atheist cannot logically conclude that there are any.
However a poster has shown me that this was wrong, there is at least one atheist that does rationalise that there is an objective set of morals.
I feel this atheist is very confused, however he is an atheist none the less.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323345021' post='2347242']
LOL. You're a fan of making broad claims that you can't possibly prove.
[/quote]
Somewhat like making a claim that god and Jesus exist and that there is a heaven and an objective set of moral.
Your arrogant hypocracy amuses me much.

Edited December 8, 2011 by stevil

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323366970' post='2347409']
I didn't see how a person whom does not believe in a god could believe in an objective set of morals. Where would the objective set of morals come from? In my opinion there are none, and in my opinion an atheist cannot logically conclude that there are any.
However a poster has shown me that this was wrong, there is at least one atheist that does rationalise that there is an objective set of morals.
I feel this atheist is very confused, however he is an atheist none the less.
[/quote]
I know I said I'm out of this thread, but I just wanted to come back for a moment to say that I actually mostly agree with this, and I've argued so in the past; without God, the only logical position I currently perceive concludes in a sort of nihilistic hedonism.
I don't think you would put it that way, Stevil, because nihilistic hedonism sounds pretty ignoble, but I think that's the logical conclusion if your position. If there is no God, I think Nietszche was right.
A good number of people disagree with my position on this, lots of people whose opinions I put a lot of weight in, but ultimately I haven't been convinced that an objective moral system is rational without recognizing a god figure.

[Ice_nine]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323367103' post='2347413']
Somewhat like making a claim that god and Jesus exist and that there is a heaven and an objective set of moral.
Your arrogant hypocracy amuses me much.
[/quote]

Hey I had more respect for you until you kept talking. Then respect dwindled. It's not just your atheism. There are a number of people who don't share in my religion on here (Hasan and J-lol are the more active ones I can think of, not sure if they're athetist/agnostic or whatever) that I enjoy reading and who can actually engage me. Your words just some pseudo-intellectual self-inflated nonsense. I can't deal with fundies of any ilk, and your arguments follow the same structure of that hard-right fundamentalist Christians.

And I could even accept crappy arguments. I never know wtf dairy-girl is talking about for example, but here's what she doesn't do, she doesn't claim her beliefs, logic, or opinions are fully represented a group of nearly a billion people like you do. I know plenty of atheists, I've talked to them, THEY'RE NOT ALL LIKE YOU AND DON'T COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSIONS THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DO. Even Kia ora, a fellow atheist, called you out and asked you "not to generalize us."

I don't see how it's arrogant of me to posses a set of beliefs and use that to try to better the world, and myself. It WOULD be arrogant if I said "this is what all Catholics think and why they think it" merely based on my solitary experience. That's the key difference that you're not getting. And if you can't even get that VERY SIMPLE fact, I doubt you can navigate through much more complex issues. Just calling it like I see it.

But if I amuse you I'm a seasonally-employed clown so i guess it fits. Maybe I don't exists though, and this is all just a dream, and you've constructed all of this in your head.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323370351' post='2347450']
I don't see how it's arrogant of me to...
[/quote]
It is arrogant of you to suggest I cannot speak of my beliefs (not based on fact) whereas your entire worldview is based on belief.

[stevil]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1323370351' post='2347450']
I don't see how it's arrogant of me to posses a set of beliefs and use that to try to better the world, and myself. It WOULD be arrogant if I said "this is what all Catholics think and why they think it" merely based on my solitary experience. That's the key difference that you're not getting. And if you can't even get that VERY SIMPLE fact, I doubt you can navigate through much more complex issues. Just calling it like I see it.
[/quote]
So the generalisation that I stated (and which you took much offense to was
"All Atheists think like me on this matter. None of us believe there are any objective morals."
Another poster showed me a blog by an Atheist stating that he did believe in objective morals. I then retracted my statement.
Up until that point I had been speaking from the "I"
So, I really don't see your problem.

[brianthephysicist]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1323368151' post='2347426']
I know I said I'm out of this thread, but I just wanted to come back for a moment to say that I actually mostly agree with this, and I've argued so in the past; without God, the only logical position I currently perceive concludes in a sort of nihilistic hedonism.
I don't think you would put it that way, Stevil, because nihilistic hedonism sounds pretty ignoble, but I think that's the logical conclusion if your position. If there is no God, I think Nietszche was right.
A good number of people disagree with my position on this, lots of people whose opinions I put a lot of weight in, but [b]ultimately I haven't been convinced that an objective moral system is rational without recognizing a god figure.[/b]
[/quote]

Most conversations on morality that I run across these days are begun with 2 assumptions: secular and morally relativistic. If you can get rid of the secular assumption, moral relativism tends to fall easily. But moral relativism can still be refuted from a completely secular worldview. I recommend reading some works by Peter Kreeft; here's a decent one to get you started if you're interested

[url="http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism/relativism_transcription.htm"]http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism/relativism_transcription.htm[/url]

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1323029239' post='2344467']
I don't subscribe to the concept of morals. I have an opinion, but that is my opinion, it is built on my upbringing, culture, environment, education, discussion with others and thoughtful contemplation.
I don't expect my opinions to be an objective morality base upon which everyone must obey.

I recognise the law as the authority but in a democratic society the law gives me the opportunity to influence and challenge.
I feel the law ought to intervene with regards to achieving a functional society, hence we shouldn't go around killing each other or seeking vigilante justice.
On matters that don't impact significantly on society, I feel the government should not intervene. I am also strongly against discrimination based on gender, race, culture, sexual orientation, skin colour, ethnicity, physical state (e.g, health or disorders), religious belief...
Although I believe people in society should be allowed to affiliate and/or teach religious belief, I am strongly against religious teaching, or organisations imposing discrimination.

In particular I don't see gay marriage or euthanasia as moral or immoral, I see these as a personal choice of the people who which to take part in these events.
[/quote]
At least you are honest in supporting murder of the weak...because that is what euthanasia is.