Does Atheism Lead to Immoral Behavior?

[F1fan]

I did not say that he was lying .. I said it is a lie. Maybe he misunderstands .. maybe that's his opinion.

I state categorically that my understanding of marriage does NOT condone rape.

Yet you can't agree that a husband forcing sex on his wife if she doesn't want to IS rape by definition. Your wording suggests that rape can never happen between married couples, so you won;t even consider it. And yes, forced sex in secular nations is rape, and that means there are human rights which is an advantage for women, and a liability for women in any nation that follows your ideals.

Yeah, we know .. and we know that religion is "backward" as far as you're concerned.

You describe uncivilized manners, why wouldn't first world people be disgusted?

That's your opinion.
Your values are contrary, but you do not perceive.
That is because you do not judge by what G-d has revealed.

Your example is a big endorsement for atheism and humanism, at least in the sense that you are "just following orders" and not thinking for yourself. You don't seem to grasp that your attitudes are vile to those who value freedom and human rights, theists included.

Yeah, yeah .. more Muslims are barbarians clap-trap.

Have you taken time to reflect on how you give that impression by sharing your attitudes? Why be surprised when first world people allow women human rights when you don't?

I don't know where you live, but let's say if your neighbor's wife went to the police and filed a complaint against her husband for sexual assault would he not be arrested? Or do you live somewhere where law lines up with your beliefs?

 

[Audie]

I don't.
I did not see love and harmony, when "the iron lady" was PM

We sure don't see much in the whole history of Islam and today either one.

 

[Audie]

You what?
Have any men actually accused their wives of marital rape?

What, they would not dare complain in
an Islamic country? Who knew.
So lovely to be a woman under islam

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Marriage guarantees nothing.

You are so right!
Unfortunately.

But marriage can give the other partner, more confidence in their mate’s fidelity.

Do you think cancer cells came about through the same intelligent guidance?

No, of course not!
Do you think I believe that evolution / adaptation never occurs / occurred? I know it happens…

The Bible actually indicates it has… in Genesis, God told Adam that He had given Adam, “all green vegetation” for food (Genesis 1:29). Can we eat “all green vegetation” today? No way.

So this tells us that organisms can change…a “survival of the fittest”: if plants can’t be eaten, they’ll more likely survive.

Organisms have mutated without Jehovah’s control & intervention. Due to the issue over rulership, raised in Gen.3:1-6, Jehovah has allowed mankind to do what they want. And this Earth He has left to be governed by its own natural forces & systems…again, without His control.


But more than that…with Adam’s rebellion, he lost his perfection; he became imperfect. A sinner.

And he could not pass on perfect, endless life to his offspring. Only imperfection, & sin resulting in death. Romans 5:12

So our bodies age, break down, and die. But created as Jehovah God’s children, such wasn’t His purpose at the beginning.

 

[F1fan]

You are so right!
Unfortunately.

But marriage can give the other partner, more confidence in their mate’s fidelity.

Yes, even insecure people are motivated to get married. Does it assure their partners are loyal? No.

No, of course not!
Do you think I believe that evolution / adaptation never occurs / occurred? I know it happens…

If you accept science then why are you believing in gods and magic? Science explains any question you might have, but you are still falling back on obsolete religious claims?

The Bible actually indicates it has… in Genesis, God told Adam that He had given Adam, “all green vegetation” for food (Genesis 1:29). Can we eat “all green vegetation” today? No way.

These ancient stories are not fact-based, and no rational person tries to interpret them literally.

So this tells us that organisms can change…a “survival of the fittest”: if plants can’t be eaten, they’ll more likely survive.

Organisms have mutated without Jehovah’s control & intervention. Due to the issue over rulership, raised in Gen.3:1-6, Jehovah has allowed mankind to do what they want. And this Earth He has left to be governed by its own natural forces & systems…again, without His control.

You are contaminating your thinking with religion. All you have to do is read science. That's it. Read what experts report, and learn. That's how you become educated and a winner.

But more than that…with Adam’s rebellion, he lost his perfection; he became imperfect. A sinner.

That what the myth says. It isn't fact-based.

And he could not pass on perfect, endless life to his offspring. Only imperfection, & sin resulting in death. Romans 5:12

So our bodies age, break down, and die. But created as Jehovah God’s children, such wasn’t His purpose at the beginning.

This is what primitive people dreampt up because they did not have science and reasoning. No rational person in the 21st century should think these are literally true.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Is that an argument for following those guidelines? Following my own guidelines on sex was beneficial to me.

That’s good, I’m glad!
You’ve made beneficial choices for you and your wife.


Sometimes though, what’s beneficial for us, might entail some discomfort, at least in the short-term.

I think that many people, in making choices, choose behaviors that bring happiness temporarily, but are ultimately detrimental.

So do we, but without the children. There are other ways to live life that can lead to happiness. I can attest to that from personal experience. My wife and I ….have had a good life.

Nothing wrong with that!

How is promiscuity selfishness? Is trying as many restaurants as one can selfish, too?

Do you really want to equate the two?
First off, you must pay for eating at a restaurant. Not really selfish…

(Unless you want to go there…I’d rather not. Lol.)

Promiscuous people don’t look out for the other person’s advantage… only for what they can get out of it. For the most part.

Can you present peer-reviewed articles that reveal otherwise?

You might be very honest, I think you are….but usually the partner chosen for a one-night-fling, is chosen for their looks, not honesty.

Is it their intent to be honest?

Have you ever had anyone approach you for a pick-up & sex, and then honestly tell you before the act, “BTW, I have gonorrhea / syphilis / HIV, hope that’s ok”?

You're posting to people who have already lived a lifetime their own way and without regret. What are you going to teach them about the dangers of sex?

Nothing. I just posted some links, my friend.

I don't see how you arrived at that conclusion from my comment. Maybe you could connect them for me. I wrote, "I disagree. It was to generate children and to guarantee paternity. It was to make families large, not strong. Most of that behavior, whether compelled or forbidden, is of little to no benefit to anybody in the family. This is why women encouraged to get married as soon as they were fertile and forbidden to deny their husbands sex even if that's not what they wanted - to make families larger, not stronger. How does forbidding masturbation or the rhythm method make families stronger? It doesn't. It makes them larger."

Why do you say that if this were true, there's be no need for families. Who's going to raise all of these children?

I added more, you know. A village concept, would aid growth, if that were all that was wanted. And marriage wouldn’t be necessary. But it was required in ancient Israel.

I wish you had commented on why you disagree if you do. Did I post something you consider false? If you think so, why?

I did add commentary… I said, “How you think our cells, with all of their exquisite & functional protein-building machinery working together, could have arisen without any intelligent guidance, is beyond me.”
There’s no empirical science to support any natural mechanisms creating cellular machinery de novo.

We haven’t seen it.

We’ve observed the breakdown of genes which provided some benefit (at the cost of other benefits), but never have new genes arisen.

You believe a god exists that wasn't intelligently designed. Which do you consider more complex, a living cell, or a deity? Why wouldone need a designer but not both?

I don’t know how invisible structures work; thanks to science I do know that energy, in one form or another, has always existed. So God’s eternal existence, in a form of energy we haven’t yet discovered, presents no problem.

I also know that complexity, encompassing a purpose of function & an arrangement of parts, requires design.
No matter what instruments or structures we’ve ever discovered in a non-organic form, we’ve always attributed a mind behind it. Why should we assume the exquisitely-more-complicated life forms we’ve uncovered, to not be designed?
That’s not logical.

To me.

Best wishes.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Science explains any question you might have,

Oh, really? You haven’t read much, if you think that.
There are soo many unanswered questions! Grief!!

Tell me, how did gravity arrange the setting of the planets in our solar system, into their orbits?

We know how it keeps them there. How did it put them there?

Really, we know very little!

These ancient stories are not fact-based, and no rational person tries to interpret them literally.

So… the Jews were liars, huh?

Sorry, been there….won’t go back.

Time and again, historical references in the Bible have been accurately proven.

Have a good night.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why be surprised when first world people allow women human rights when you don't?

It is not about human rights.
Why should Muslims not care about their wives and daughters?
Are we not part of the human race?

I judge by what G-d has revealed, and so do Muslim women.
If women are violated by their husbands, their family cares.

We want our women folk to be happy .. and not living with someone they don't approve of.

I don't know where you live, but let's say if your neighbor's wife went to the police and filed a complaint against her husband for sexual assault would he not be arrested? Or do you live somewhere where law lines up with your beliefs?

I honestly don't know the answer to that. I expect it would depend on the evidence.
I live in the UK.

A Muslim father wouldn't expect any of their daughters to go to the police about their husbands.
First of all, they would come to their mother/father/brother etc.
They would then talk to the accused, and get his side of the story.

Normally, it wouldn't come to that [getting police involved] .. unless he had caused serious harm.
A Muslim woman would not stay with an unreasonable husband.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If a daughter or wife reported that she's been raped while out walking in the park, or out shopping,
the police would be informed immediately.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

That’s good, I’m glad. You’ve made beneficial choices for you and your wife. Sometimes though, what’s beneficial for us, might entail some discomfort, at least in the short-term. I think that many people, in making choices, choose behaviors that bring happiness temporarily, but are ultimately detrimental.

My point is that one needn't follow religions' requirements for its adherents to have good, happy marriages.

Do you really want to equate the two?

I'm comparing the similarities between sampling multiple sexual partners and sampling multiple restaurants. You called the former selfish. I don't see how. Sex between mutually consenting partners can be a win-win when done properly. Even if one is disappointed and gets nothing out of the encounter or relationship, selfishness is not an issue.

First off, you must pay for eating at a restaurant.

Why is that relevant? Even if restaurants were free, I'd probably like to sample a large number of them. You haven't made the case that having multiple partners is inherently selfish or a problem in any other way. You refer to the undesirable consequences of unprotected sex, but so what? Those aren't good enough reasons to avoid safe sex outside of marriage.

Promiscuous people don’t look out for the other person’s advantage… only for what they can get out of it.

Decent people do both with all of their partners.

Can you present peer-reviewed articles that reveal otherwise?

Do I need to? I have my life experience that contradicts your claim.

A village concept, would aid growth, if that were all that was wanted

Where I live in Mexico, extended families share in childcare. In the States, one often needs a sitter and daycare if the grandparents aren't involved in child rearing. To maximize populations, all one need do is keep every fertile womb pregnant. Maximal population growth follows. Marriage helps firm up the commitment with many and keeps those babies coming and supported. Population attrition due to war, childbirth, infant mortality, infection, and food poisoning made this a legitimate societal concern once, but no longer. We have too many people today, but the American church is hellbent on forcing even more births based in these ancient mores born of ancient needs.

I did add commentary… I said, “How you think our cells, with all of their exquisite & functional protein-building machinery working together, could have arisen without any intelligent guidance, is beyond me.”

I wrote, "I wish you had commented on why you disagree if you do. Did I post something you consider false? If you think so, why?" I don't see your answer why you disagree, just THAT you disagree, and what you believe instead.

There’s no empirical science to support any natural mechanisms creating cellular machinery de novo.

Yes, there is, but why is that relevant? Would that make the process impossible in your estimation? There once was no such science, and it was possible then as now.

I don’t know how invisible structures work; thanks to science I do know that energy, in one form or another, has always existed. So God’s eternal existence, in a form of energy we haven’t yet discovered, presents no problem.

I wrote, "You believe a god exists that wasn't intelligently designed. Which do you consider more complex, a living cell, or a deity? Why would one need a designer but not both?" I didn't see your answer there, so I'll answer. A god would be orders of magnitude more complex than a living cell, and if that complexity is evidence of an intelligent designer when found in a cell, it's evidence that the intelligent designer was itself intelligently designed. On the other hand, if gods can exist without intelligent designers, so can cells. To insist otherwise is special pleading.

I also know that complexity, encompassing a purpose of function & an arrangement of parts, requires design.

Except in a god, right?

No matter what instruments or structures we’ve ever discovered in a non-organic form, we’ve always attributed a mind behind it. Why should we assume the exquisitely-more-complicated life forms we’ve uncovered, to not be designed?

Inorganic chemicals are capable of chemical evolution and cannot generate the macromolecules that characterize life like proteins, complex carbohydrates, long-chain lipids, and nucleic acids. Only carbon chemistry does that.

You were talking about marriages where there is no clear leader.. Imagine a country where there is no leader .. why do they have leaders?

Why do you think that's relevant to families? My family has no clear leader.

The Bible and Qur'an teach differently.

Irrelevant except to their adherents. Neither are adequate sources for moral guidance to the critical thinker.

by atheists, but not by G-d.

Once again, skeptics are uninterested in what others believe about gods.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Irrelevant except to their adherents. Neither are adequate sources for moral guidance to the critical thinker.

Well you carry on with your "critical thinking", and I'll carry on believing G-d.

I'm also a "critical thinker".
I can envisage a scenario, where a woman is fed-up with their husband and frames him with "marital rape" to get rid of them.

It seems your version of "critical thinking" doesn't care about that.

 

[Audie]

Well you carry on with your "critical thinking", and I'll carry on believing G-d.

I'm also a "critical thinker".
I can envisage a scenario, where a woan is fed-up with their husband and frames him with "marital rape" to get rid of them.

It seems your version of "critical thinking" doesn't care about that.

Belief in things for which there is no evidence
is the opposite of critical thinking.

If you are are an anti- Islam undercover poster
you are quite efrective.

A benefit of living in China is we don't tolerate Islam.
Come enjoy the islam- free society sometime.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Belief in things for which there is no evidence
is the opposite of critical thinking.

If you are are an anti- Islam undercover poster
you are quite efrective.

A benefit of living in China is we don't tolerate Islam.
Come enjoy the islam- free society sometime.

What is your evidence for a free society?

 

[F1fan]

Oh, really? You haven’t read much, if you think that.
There are soo many unanswered questions! Grief!!

And that is part of your responsibility as a non-expert in many areas of knowledge, just like me.

Tell me, how did gravity arrange the setting of the planets in our solar system, into their orbits?

There are plenty of answers available for free on the internet explained by experts. If you are curious about this, then do your homework.

I was recently curious how long after the Big Bang event did the four forces start working and it was in a fraction of a second. I thought it took about 2 secconds but I couldn't remember, so I looked it up. So you are capable of looking up answers yourself.

Now of course there is some uncertainty about many things, and that is part of our knowledge, to not have certainty about some things. That is OK, we can wait until experts gather more data and report findings. Experts do offer models and plausible answers that we accept as lay people.

I understand that some believers feel threatened by science and have contempt for experts, but that is their problem, and a result of bad cultural influence from a long tradition of invalid religious belief, namely creationism from literalist interpretation of Genesis.

We know how it keeps them there. How did it put them there?

Really, we know very little!

Ask experts and defer to their explanations. The science of physics is remarkably predicctable and stable. Look at how NASA can hit an asteroid with a spacecraft with precision. Does that happen because we know very little? Do you have any clue how they were able to do this?

NASA’s DART Mission Hits Asteroid in First-Ever Planetary Defense Test - NASA

After 10 months flying in space, NASA’s Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) – the world’s first planetary defense technology demonstration – successfully

www.nasa.gov

Here's what we know very little about: do any gods exist? Thus far of the thousands of gods in human lore none are known to exist outside of human imagination. Yet that is where you put your energy in to finding answers? From the diversity of answers you have to guess which are true, and no experts to help you out. Could you be mistaken in your religious beleifs?

So… the Jews were liars, huh?

Only when Christians and Muslims interpret their stories literally. The Jews treat these stories as allegories, not literal. Atheists agree with Jews, and any Christian and Muslim that does NOT interpret these stories literally.

So do you? Does your interpretation of Genesis differ from Jews?

Time and again, historical references in the Bible have been accurately proven.

Irrelevant. Fictional stories often include historical facts. For example the book A Tale of Two Cities takes place in paris and London durin g the French Revolution. For Whom the Bell Tolls takes place during the Spanish Civil War, but most characters are fictional.

The city of Troy was once thought to be fictional until it was discovered, so does this mean the Iliad, with all it's Greek gods, is literally true?

 

[F1fan]

It is not about human rights.

It is to civilized nations and their people. Your attitude is obsolete and stuck in the past, well before human rights was a valued principle.

Why should Muslims not care about their wives and daughters?

I'm sure many that have adopted modern attitudes do. But your attitude does not. It cares about male paternalism.

Are we not part of the human race?

Being human does not assure all humans are decent and moral. As we see many humans will adopt toxic religious and/or political views that harm others to benefit themselves. Humanism opposes this temptation.

I judge by what G-d has revealed, and so do Muslim women.

Assuming God revealed anything, which is questionable. So you are still responsible and accountable for what you believe. You can't pass on your personal responsibility to God or the Quran when you act based on what you believe. YOU are accountable. Those in this forum are explaining to you that your beliefs do not have authority over women if they choose otherwise, even if married. A husband can't mistreat his wife by sexually assaulting her, even if you don't think it's actually rape.

If women are violated by their husbands, their family cares.

Of course. But according to you it's allowable if she can't prove it. Or if it is rape. Too bad for her.

We want our women folk to be happy .. and not living with someone they don't approve of.

But according to you thus far if she doesn't allow her husband her body for sex when he wants it, too bad, her happiness is irrelevant.

You want things both ways. You claim you want your women happy, but won't extend her respect to refuse sex. Which is more important, her happiness, or her being a sex object?

I honestly don't know the answer to that. I expect it would depend on the evidence.
I live in the UK.

OK, a first world nation with human rights. So what would you think if a Muslim wife filed charges against her husband for rape (you can't reject this definition because it is the law in the UK) and he was arrested? Would you condemn the law?

A Muslim father wouldn't expect any of their daughters to go to the police about their husbands.
First of all, they would come to their mother/father/brother etc.
They would then talk to the accused, and get his side of the story.

This would surely occur to avoid embarrassment. But you seem to acknowledge that a husband's forcing sex on his wife could lead to her unhappiness. Does a husband not care? Is the wife wrong to feel unhappy about forced sex?

Normally, it wouldn't come to that [getting police involved] .. unless he had caused serious harm.
A Muslim woman would not stay with an unreasonable husband.

Your thoughts about what "serious harm" is seems quite limited to physical harm, and ignores emotional harm, which is often harder to resolve than physical injuries.

If a daughter or wife reported that she's been raped while out walking in the park, or out shopping,
the police would be informed immediately.

Sure, being raped by a stranger doesn't have the familial baggage of marital abuse. It is embarrassing to any family when there is abuse and assault. I know women who have had to go though all that, and the trauma is unique in that the threat is in the home and can happen any time.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

how did gravity arrange the setting of the planets in our solar system, into their orbits? We know how it keeps them there. How did it put them there?

Gravity pulled them. It caused them to form from the collapsing solar nebula, and it holds them in orbit. Planets are falling into the sun while experiencing motion in a direction perpendicular to the line connecting the planet and star, and so never actually fall in

we know very little!

We know quite a bit about gravity. We know what we need to know about it to predict its actions and make it work for us.

Time and again, historical references in the Bible have been accurately proven.

Many have been discredited.

If a daughter or wife reported that she's been raped while out walking in the park, or out shopping,
the police would be informed immediately

But not if it happened at home by a husband.

I'm also a "critical thinker".

I'm glad that you put that in quotes. You're not a critical thinker by academic standards. You would need to be able to evaluate evidence and arguments for soundness and reject insufficiently supported propositions such as the unfalsifiable claims about gods.

I can envisage a scenario, where a woman is fed-up with their husband and frames him with "marital rape" to get rid of them. It seems your version of "critical thinking" doesn't care about that.

Of course I would care about that. Of the two of us, I'm the one that respects the law in all instances. I would hope that anybody guilty of that crime is prosecuted for it. I'm very disappointed that they gave a pass to the woman whose lies led to the death of Emmet Till: https://www.npr.org/2022/08/09/1116562931/grand-jury-emmett-till-woman-carolyn-bryant-donham#:~:text=for a photo.-,A grand jury in Mississippi has declined to indict the,Till nearly 70 years ago.&text=JACKSON, Miss.

 

[muhammad_isa]

So what would you think if a Muslim wife filed charges against her husband for rape (you can't reject this definition because it is the law in the UK) and he was arrested? Would you condemn the law?

I condemn the law, and I would advise any of my women folk not to do so.
If they ignored me, there isn't a lot I can do.
..but carry on with my own life.

This would surely occur to avoid embarrassment..

No .. it would surely occur, just as the police would interview the accused.
The difference is, that we take in-laws seriously as part of the family.
..to the police, it is just another case .. a number.

I know women who have had to go though all that, and the trauma is unique in that the threat is in the home and can happen any time.

That is not good .. where is the woman's family?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Of course I would care about that. Of the two of us, I'm the one that respects the law in all instances.

Rubbish!
You only respect "your version" of the law.
You would not agree if Islamic law was in force.

I would hope that anybody guilty of that crime is prosecuted for it..

..and how can that occur?
If a woman says "no", and she provoked her husband to mistreat her,
she is always right by law.

 

[F1fan]

I condemn the law, and I would advise any of my women folk not to do so.

So you will justify criminal activity due to your immoral religious beliefs.

Remind me, what's the title of this thread?

If they ignored me, there isn't a lot I can do.

Good for them, because if you were in a Muslim theocracy you might be able to have them arrested and executed. That's why secular governments are better for human rights.

..but carry on with my own life.

As useless as your beliefs are in a nation that values individual rights over religious extremism.

No .. it would surely occur, just as the police would interview the accused.
The difference is, that we take in-laws seriously as part of the family.
..to the police, it is just another case .. a number.

You don't think to be concerned that a husband is mistreating his wife, and that your God is supposedly watching it all happen. You don't seem to feel shame or embarrassment that Muslim men could be accused of rape. Aren't you concerned what your God thinks? It's almost as if you are a closet atheist and just using your religious belief as an excuse to control women. If Muslim men really believed their God exists why are there ANY cases of husbands abusing their wives?

That is not good .. where is the woman's family?

What can they do after their daughter has been raped and abused?

Why aren't you asking why Muslim boys aren't being taught to respect women and their wives? Your obsolete attitude does not work in first world nations, so all you are doing is teaching boys an attitude they can't use, and will only cause them more stress. Why not just accept the laws of the UK and teach Muslim boys to respect women as a social norm?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The difference is, that we take in-laws seriously as part of the family.

The difference is that you don't take the law seriously. You respect your in-group's rules more than the law. Religions tend to be anti-patriotic in that sense. American Christians attempting to criminalize abortion appear to have no use for its Constitution or church-state separation. Their religion and god come before their neighbors.

You only respect "your version" of the law.

No. You wrote, "I condemn the law, and I would advise any of my women folk not to do so." Apparently, your words apply to you.

You would not agree if Islamic law was in force.

I would not freely live where Islamic law was enforced on unbelievers.

and how can that occur?

I've already answered this, plus you should know. You file a complaint with the police. If there is sufficient merit to the complaint, and investigation follows, and if a winnable case can be made, and indictment follows followed by a trial and a verdict. Or, in your world, just tell the in-laws instead and have the complaint ignored and shun the complainer or order an honor killing for shaming the family.

If a woman says "no", and she provoked her husband to mistreat her, she is always right by law.

If her husband mistreats her, she IS right by the law.

How did you miss out on Western values? It's like you're Taliban with your views of the rights and place of women. Who else in your world shares those views, and why did you accept them?

Antitheism is the idea that some of these religions make the world worse and need to be diminished in social effect. Do you have an idea how opinions like yours affect others' opinions of your religion and why they believe that it needs to be kept powerless outside of the lives of unbelievers, and why unbelievers want fewer people to be raised with such values? Humanists (and others with similar values) don't want our neighbors thinking like that.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You don't think to be concerned that a husband is mistreating his wife, and that your God is supposedly watching it all happen.

Of course I care.
The husband is somebody's son, and the wife is somebody's daughter.
It is better not to involve the police, if possible .. I'm sure they would agree.
They don't want trouble, and family feuds and what have you.

If Muslim men really believed their God exists why are there ANY cases of husbands abusing their wives?

That is a stupid question .. we are all capable of evil.

What can they do after their daughter has been raped and abused?

Have you no idea at all?
We have been through all of this already.

If any of my woman folk were in fear of violence from their husband, I would advise them to leave
and seek divorce.