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

[KWED]

Not! I leaned about my value by being loved by the ruler of the universe... not by being whipped when I did wrong.

You still don't seem to be able to grasp this.
Your moral framework is prescribed by a higher authority. It is enforced through promise of reward (including "being loved by god") and the threat of punishment.
This is no different to your explanation of why dogs are not moral beings.

 

[KWED]

Because a universe fart can't be valuable.

You seem confused. The universe does not have a digestive system that creates gas.

If you mean that a person in a universe without gods cannot have value, then you are wrong. It has been explained to you many times, in terms that my cat could understand.
It is interesting how often religionists are repeated to use barefaced dishonesty in order to promote their position. More "Lies for Jesus" I guess.

 

[KWED]

No you don't. Claiming you love people you will never meet isn't actually doing anything.

Don't you listen to Jesus?
"Love thy neighbour" doesn't literally mean "love the person living next door", it means "love all of your fellow humans".
Have you not been doing this? Oops!

 

[KWED]

No, it's what I've observed in animals behavior over the last forty plus years.

Sorry, I hadn't realised that you were a qualified animal behaviourist. Which particular species have you been studying and could you link to your published work.
Thanks.

 

[KWED]

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.

Once again, you are just describing how religious morality works.
You believe what god says is required in order to gain acceptance/reward and avoid punishment. When god causes genocide, you try and defend it.
So why should I assume that you are a moral agent?

 

[KWED]

Is English your first language?

I have a feeling it might be 'Murcan.

 

[muhammad_isa]

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

All of us were created "in God's image" .. both the righteous and evil doers.
The phrase "in God's image" refers to spiritual qualities that we understand such as being able to love and feel anger, and to trust, possess wisdom etc. It does not refer to physical form.

Furthermore, God has perfect knowledge and His spiritual qualities are perfect while humans are not.

 

[Link]

All of us were created "in God's image" .. both the righteous and evil doers.
The phrase "in God's image" refers to spiritual qualities that we understand such as being able to love and feel anger, and to trust, possess wisdom etc. It does not refer to physical form.

Furthermore, God has perfect knowledge and His spiritual qualities are perfect while humans are not.

Welcome back. Been a while since I seen you post.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Welcome back. Been a while since I seen you post.

Thankyou.

I feel like I'm dying .. I have bad mental and physical health.
We ask God to forgive us for our trespasses. Amen.

 

[Link]

Thankyou.

I feel like I'm dying .. I have bad mental and physical health.
We ask God to forgive us for our trespasses. Amen.

Salam

I'm sorry to hear. You can elaborate if you wish.

 

[ppp]

All of us were created "in God's image" .. both the righteous and evil doers.
The phrase "in God's image" refers to spiritual qualities that we understand such as being able to love and feel anger, and to trust, possess wisdom etc. It does not refer to physical form.

Furthermore, God has perfect knowledge and His spiritual qualities are perfect while humans are not.

The conversation was not about physical form. No one was saying that God had a tiny moustache.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

We have value because God created us with value.

I get a mental picture of you closing your eyes and stuffing your ears while you chant the above.

 

[Wildswanderer]

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.

Funny coming from a guy who can't understand that Hitler had the ability to be a moral human.

 

[Wildswanderer]

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.

Lol, you didn't even address late term abortions. Just babbling about with the same old falsehoods.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Late-stage abortions are through medical necessity.

Nope. Most are not. That's another common lie.

 

[Wildswanderer]

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.

Again you never address anything I said.

 

[Wildswanderer]

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.

You literally said a fetus is the same as a toenail.

 

[Wildswanderer]

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



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.

If it's subjective, it's not morality, it's just what is convenient.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Once again, you are just describing how religious morality works.
You believe what god says is required in order to gain acceptance/reward and avoid punishment. When god causes genocide, you try and defend it.
So why should I assume that you are a moral agent?

No, I believe what God says through his Son, equals morality. For example, do unto others as you would want them to do to you. Love your worst enemy. If someone asks for your coat give him your shirt too. This isn't based on reward, btw according to scripture. In fact if you only act this way to those who do good to you there's no reason you should be rewarded. Read the gospels.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Sorry, I hadn't realised that you were a qualified animal behaviourist. Which particular species have you been studying and could you link to your published work.
Thanks.

I've studied bovines, chickens, raccoon, muskrat, fox, coyote, mink, sheep, goats and dogs.
Work being published doesn't mean someone has real experience sadly. A lot of wildlife management for example is done by people who know less than I do about wild animals.