• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

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

Sheldon

Veteran Member
The unborn are a group of people.

They are neither a group nor people.

Sadly language is not the forte of many who have had their education blighted by superstition.

Also there is no deliberate attempt to eradicate any group, only individual women exercising bodily autonomy, that some men sadly are so weak and stupid, they despise women for it.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Wildswanderer said:
You don't seem to understand the difference between Hitler being made in God's image and God being a Hitler.
That's not remotely what I said, so lets jog your memory as it was literally hours ago. :D
Wow, the deity you imagine is a comparable image of Hitler?

I've emboldened it for you, and coloured it red, and enlarged it, since your post seems wildly confused. I know lets try bullet points:

1. You said "Hitler was a human made in God's image"
2. I said: "Wow, the deity you imagine is a comparable image of Hitler?"
3. You responded with "I never said that anywhere. You just made it up."
4. I then quoted your claim in red and emboldened it.
5. You then dishonestly changed what I'd said to "God being a Hitler"

Now so your memory doesn't fail you again, let's quote the exchange for everyone to see. ;)

Hitler was a human made in God's image,

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

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

I then quoted your claim, and here above for all to see, again. You then responded with:

You don't seem to understand the difference between Hitler being made in God's image and God being a Hitler.

So you're still debating in bad faith it seems.

So to be clear was Hitler made in your deity's image, as you clearly claimed, or not? Your posts seem very confused..:rolleyes:



 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp

Sheldon

Veteran Member
life without a deity is just a cosmic accident.

Life without mermaids is a cosmic accident.

Life without unicorns is a cosmic accident.

Like without garden fairies is a cosmic accident.

Life without Santa Claus is a cosmic accident.

Hmm, it loses nothing no matter what woo woo you put in, that suggest it's poor reasoning.
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Nonsense, unless you consider sex to be unnatural or man made. Is artificial another word you don't understand?


No they don't and no I'm not, why would I be since I am pro choice.
More falsehoods. Thosands of late term abortions happen every year. If he's a person after a certain stage of development then you obviously support murder.
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Yes it's clear from your posts that you don't understand what moral means, and the idea it's not an aid to survival proves that.

I'll go slowly then, imagine a gorilla that hadn't a clue what any of the other gorillas would find acceptable behaviour within the social group, would this make it more or less likely to survive? Do take your time with this one. It's a bit more complex than recognising when a dog is helping you understand it's bladder is full.
Why would you assume gorillas are moral agents?
Again just survival instinct says do what others find acceptable. That means if others find killing accepted, roll with it.
 

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Morality
noun
  1. principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.
In any social group not being able to understand what is and is not acceptable behaviour would end pretty badly for any individual. Like your dog not being able to learn how to teach you to open the door when it had a full bladder. The real irony is your disdain for that dog. Hitler didn't seem able to learn how to modify his behaviour for the mutual benefit of others, yet you think he was better than your dog. I have to be honest I'd not have anything near me I considered "worse than Hitler", but then your claims are pretty bizarre.
Do you really think Hitler was born evil? Evil is a progress one either invites or rejects. Hitler wasn't inherently evil, he chose evil actions. We are not inherently more or less evil than Hitler. We all have the potential for great good or much evil.
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
No, it's what I've observed in animals behavior over the last forty plus years.
I asked you: given action X, by what criteria can it be determined whether or not X is moral. Others have asked you the same with a similar silence. Before you can have a credible opinion on a subject, you need to first demonstrate a grasp of that subject.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Then it's not morals at all, just selfishness.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Having the ability to be moral doesn't mean sharing the same subjective morals. The ability to differentiate between subjectively right and wrong behaviours means an animal is capable of morality, by definition. Do you think Nazis were able to be moral? They seemed to be after fascism was defeated. Once they were able to reason for themselves, free ideological indoctrination they seemed to have that ability, odd that.
 
Last edited:

Sheldon

Veteran Member
More falsehoods. Thosands of late term abortions happen every year. If he's a person after a certain stage of development then you obviously support murder.

Falsehoods? You think sex is man made? The mysoginystic anti-choicers may want abortion to be murder, but it's not by definition. Look the word up. Any more than it could be called genocide by any half literate person. Again look the word up. The fact anti-choicers have to resort to lies and use false and inaccurate terms infers something about their arguments, something beyond mere duplicity I'd say.

A blastocyst isn't a person, that's axiomatic, but even if it were, it would be immoral to insist it could take away the rights of women to bodily autonomy, as has been amply demonstrated. Since all the anti-choicers are happy to kill (their own vernacular) kidney patients by not letting them use their bodies against their will, and exercise their right to live(again their own ridiculous vernacular).

All the rest is coloured bubbles.
 
Last edited:

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Why would you assume gorillas are moral agents?

I haven't assumed this, if people want to deny facts that's their prerogative, but I don't have to indulge such idiocy.

Again just survival instinct says do what others find acceptable. That means if others find killing accepted, roll with it.

That would still require the ability to differentiate between right and wrong behaviours, which by definition is morality. Are you saying killing is always immoral? You may want to read the bible then, as the deity you imagine is real is depicted as a genocidal mass murderer for most of it. Were it real, it would also be by far the most prolific abolitionist.

It is simply a fact that all animals, including human animals, that have evolved to live in societal groups have evolved the ability to be moral. This does not mean all their moral judgments are the same, since morality is subjective. You seem to be conflating the ability to be moral, with adhering to what you personally consider moral.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Basically, yes. You said they were as human as a fetus.

Nonsense, I never remotely said any such thing, I challenge you to quote any post of mine saying anything like that, with a link please. Is English your first language? No offence but your posts show a poor grasp of English if you believe that I said anything like that, unless it was meant to be disingenuous of course.
 
Last edited:

Sheldon

Veteran Member
Do you really think Hitler was born evil? Evil is a progress one either invites or rejects. Hitler wasn't inherently evil, he chose evil actions. We are not inherently more or less evil than Hitler. We all have the potential for great good or much evil.

This string of straw man assumptions doesn't seem to address my post at all. You claim that Hitler was made in the image of a deity you imagine to be real, then denied that deity had a comparable image to Hitler. You also claim Hitler (humans) were "better" than dogs, but when challenged to explain why produced unevidenced woo woo and superstition, and not only couldn't show any practical or objective facts to support this ludicrous claim, you then demonstrated your own dog had shown the agility to differentiate between right and wrong behaviours, which by definition is morality. You seem to think because an animal does share the same moral ability as humans this means they're not moral, but this is of course facile nonsense.
 

Sheldon

Veteran Member
I asked you: given action X, by what criteria can it be determined whether or not X is moral. Others have asked you the same with a similar silence. Before you can have a credible opinion on a subject, you need to first demonstrate a grasp of that subject.

Ouch, to use a sporting parlance, that is a slam dunk. It's clear that those indoctrinated to believe in the errancy of moral absolutes, end up with a very poor concept of morality.
 

KWED

Scratching head, scratching knee
That's still thosands. Over 100,000 unique human beings are killed in second and third trimester abortions each year — nearly 274 babies each day.
Late-stage abortions are through medical necessity.
Are you really going to force a woman to die, or give birth to a baby that will certainly die in great suffering rather than allow her to have an abortion? Why is forcing women and babies to suffer unnecessarily so important to you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp
Top