Without God(s), what is the point?!

[Sheldon]

That's as practical as it gets. This reality you are experiencing right now is like a morning mist. But you will continue on forever after this is over.

It seems we can add practical to the list of words you seem to have your own personal definition for.

 

[Sheldon]

Wow, the deity you imagine is a comparable image of Hitler?

I never said that anywhere. You just made it up.

Ahem!

Yes, Hitler was a human made in God's image,

Oh yes you certainly did and there it is, with a link. What you've failed to do is offer any cogent explanation or evidence to support your claim that Hitler is "better than a dog", but I shan't even feign surprise at that.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
It doesn't support your point at all, it undermines it by demonstrating humans value things subjectively, as you just admitted with the example of gold.

Yes humans value things subjectively,

I know, it was you who argued against this, but at least you admit it know, thus this undermines your point.

 

[Sheldon]

What a crock. Of course it deliberately kills people. What do you think that fetus is, a fish?

ah the old "what a crock" argument, not very compelling. Of course a termination does not deliberately kill a group or nation of people, so that is a crock, and of course it is not an attempt to destroy a nation or group, thus it is risible to claim an abortion, which is an individual choice to terminate a pregnancy, is genocide. Then again most of your arguments are risible. like that dishonest straw man, where you have pretended I was disputing the word human and not the word deliberate, and ignored the rest of the definition of the word genocide, so you're still debating in bad faith as always.

Of course a blastocyst is not a person, but that is irrelevant to your spectacular errancy in claiming abortion is genocide, since it does not target a nation or group of people, as it is an individual choice each woman makes, and is not an attempt to destroy a specific group or nation.

Try again...

 

[Sheldon]

Dogs aren't capable of moral reasoning. They react to stimulus.

All animas react to stimuli, including human animals, it's in the definition, if you ever bothered to learn what words mean. It is risible to claim dogs can't learn the difference between right and wrong actions.

My dog learns that if she barks I'll open the door. If she shakes hands, she gets praised, etc. That's got nothing to do with morality, in fact it's completely self cantered.

Ah I see the problem, morality is another word you don't understand the meaning of.

morality
noun

1. principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

So by your own admission your dog has learned which behaviours are right or wrong to produce a particular response from you. You seem to be confusing morality with altruism, they're not the same. Either way that us clearly evidence dogs are capable of morality, as of course are all animals that have evolved to live in societal groups.

 

[Sheldon]

Of course they are people. They have human DNA and form human brains and limbs and human organs.

No they don't, a blastocyst has none of that, except DNA, and my toe nail clippings have that, yet you still want it to have the right to enslave a pregnant woman, by taking away her bodily autonomy.

 

[ppp]

Dogs aren't capable of moral reasoning. They react to stimulus. My dog learns that if she barks I'll open the door. If she shakes hands, she gets praised, etc. That's got nothing to do with morality, in fact it's completely self centered.

All social mammals have a sense of morality. And different social groups within a species have variations in their standards of what is and is not moral. Including humans. There is a huge amount of study and literature on the subject.

 

[Link]

All social mammals have a sense of morality. And different social groups within a species have variations in their standards of what is and is not moral. Including humans. There is a huge amount of study and literature on the subject.

I believe aside from the morality to each other in a species you mention, there is also Quranic notion that all things also have a moral choice to submit to God willingly or unwillingly. Some things opt to hate to submit to God and hence do what God states similar to how Satanic Jinn would obey Sulaiman (a) during his rule. The earth has a noble spirit and reality, and when tested to submit to God willingly, it obeyed, and when tested with taking Authority for itself - it refused to take it but rather submitted to God's Authorities.

The moon and sun also have noble spirits, but somethings obey God unwillingly, and hence are spiritually corrupt.

Of course, this is in the unseen realm and hidden language of all things, but everything has to decide between love and hate. Somethings hate submitting to God and somethings love it.

 

[ppp]

I believe aside from the morality to each other in a species you mention, there is also Quranic notion that all things also have a moral choice to submit to God willingly or unwillingly.

Of course the author(s) of the Quran have that notion. There no reason to believe the claims of the author(s) of that text.

 

[Wildswanderer]

All social mammals have a sense of morality.

Not that I've seen... Unless you define morality as what is convenient for the individual.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No they don't, a blastocyst has none of that, except DNA, and my toe nail clippings have that, yet you still want it to have the right to enslave a pregnant woman, by taking away her bodily autonomy.

Do your toenails form organs and limbs if you don't cut them? Dumbest argument ever.

 

[Wildswanderer]

So by your own admission your dog has learned which behaviours are right or wrong to produce a particular response from you.

So will a prisoner. That doesn't make him moral it's just a survival instinct.

 

[Wildswanderer]

since it does not target a nation or group of people,

The unborn are a group of people.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Ahem!



Oh yes you certainly did and there it is, with a link. What you've failed to do is offer any cogent explanation or evidence to support your claim that Hitler is "better than a dog", but I shan't even feign surprise at that.

You don't seem to understand the difference between Hitler being made in God's image and God being a Hitler.
Hitler wasn't inherently evil, he chose evil. God can't choose evil because it's against his nature. Being made in God's image certainly doesn't equal having all of God's attributes.

The imago Dei is not a quality possessed by man; it is a condition in which man lives.
Since the fall man's moral purity has been lost and his sinful character certainly does not reflect God’s holiness. So yes, we a broken images, but precious to God nonetheless.
Everyone is a sinner, Hitler just took it to the extreme. So singling out the individual really in meaningless. We are still eternal beings because that how God created everyone. We are therefore of much more value than a sparrow, or a dog.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not the kiddies with terminal illness though, so that's a strange deity you imagine, that cares about an insentient clump of cells, but not about children or suffering.

Of course he cares about kids with terminal illness. Why would you assume otherwise?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Meaningless platitudes are not explanations.

You said there were "people that no human loves". I asked you to support that claim. You have been unable to do so.

You think everyone on earth recieves love? Seriously? You have never heard of parents killing and abusing thier own kids? You don't know about children being abandoned because they are the wrong gender? Do you live under a rock?

 

[Wildswanderer]

So you admit that life can have value and meaning for atheists.

Is the value and meaning of your life derived from yourself and those around you, or is it simply imposed by god?

I never said life can't have value to the atheist. But his value system doesn't support his own value. Taken to it's logical conclusion, life without a deity is just a cosmic accident.

 

[Wildswanderer]

One of these foetuses will grow into a human and one into a fish. Care to tell me which ones?

View attachment 66117

The one with human DNA.

 

[Wildswanderer]

How is that any different to you learning what is "good" and "bad" from a higher authority based on reward and punishment?

I don't have value because I learned anything. Facepalm!
Morality isn't about reaction to stimulu.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Of course they aren't. (We can do this all day, but the law and medical science says they are not, so I win).

My poop has human DNA.

Why does that future possibility make an early-stage foetus "a person"?
Is a cell that can be used to clone a human also "a person", because it has the same potential?

A cell doesn't develop into a human without artificial assistance. And BTW lots of later stage abortions happen so I assume you are against those?