"Outside human desires there is no moral standard." atheism

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
BertSpam Russell.

Hedonism is probably the most extreme. It declares that whatever brings the most pleasure is right. In other words, if it feels good, do it. If this position is true, then there is no basis from which to judge the actions of Adolf Hitler as being evil.


Conservapedia is famous for triggering hedonists.

I have been begging atheists to post their sacred writ and objective rules. Appears none understand the request.
 

5wize

Well-known member
Chirp... chirp.... chirp...

Are you getting the message now of how not taken seriously you are Borat?
 

The Pixie

Active member
BertSpam Russell.

Hedonism is probably the most extreme. It declares that whatever brings the most pleasure is right. In other words, if it feels good, do it. If this position is true, then there is no basis from which to judge the actions of Adolf Hitler as being evil.
You are on record saying you "had 16 cruising sloops". That sounds like you spend a huge amount of money on your own luxuries, Authie. That is money could have chosen to help people who are starving in Africa, but you chose not. Chose not to because it felt good to own all those boats, presumably. As you say, "whatever brings the most pleasure is right."

I would have more respect for Christians spouting of about morality if it looked like they followed this supposedly great morality. CXhristians who routinely lie, who claim to live in the lap of luxury are just hypocrites.
 
I have been begging atheists to post their sacred writ and objective rules. Appears none understand the request.
It does not exist because there is no single, monolithic atheistic religion. We have no creed, no writ. We are united only by a lack of belief in gods.

Your morality is also just your opinions and subjective morality. You claim your morals are objectively from God. But I have never seen you prove it.

Try this - explain to us if marijuana is moral or immoral without using your subjective, personal opinion. Show us how you use an objective standard to decide if marijuana is moral.

If you can do this then you will have proven that you do have an objective moral standard. If not, maybe you should stop claiming that.
 

Furion

Active member
It does not exist because there is no single, monolithic atheistic religion. We have no creed, no writ. We are united only by a lack of belief in gods.

Then the OP is correct, there is no moral basis for you to condemn another, like Hitler.

Getting an atheist to admit this is not easy, but I think you are consistent enough to concede it.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
This thread's author has the least credibility of anyone on the internet. Ever.

Even the guy who created Timecube is more believable.
 

Furion

Active member
This thread's author has the least credibility of anyone on the internet. Ever.

Even the guy who created Timecube is more believable.

This is fallacious.

The OP's subject is in mind, not the poster.

What gives credibility is to answer the gist of the questions.

Many would tell me that you, an atheist, has no credibility. I say that to show you your criteria is skewed, not to defend any poster. It is just a "mean girl" game in play here. If there is someone who bothers you, don't respond to them.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
This is fallacious.

The OP's subject is in mind, not the poster.

What gives credibility is to answer the gist of the questions.

Many would tell me that you, an atheist, has no credibility. I say that to show you your criteria is skewed, not to defend any poster. It is just a "mean girl" game in play here. If there is someone who bothers you, don't respond to them.
None of which changes the fact that the thread's author has, if possible, negative credibility and any statement or claim made by him should be viewed by default as false.
 

Whatsisface

Active member
Then the OP is correct, there is no moral basis for you to condemn another, like Hitler.

Getting an atheist to admit this is not easy, but I think you are consistent enough to concede it.
Why would you as a Christian condemn Hitler?
 
Then the OP is correct, there is no moral basis for you to condemn another, like Hitler.
There is a moral basis - my own subjective sense of right and wrong. Just like yours. Just like everyone's.
Getting an atheist to admit this is not easy, but I think you are consistent enough to concede it.
Are you claiming that your morals are not your subjective opinions on right and wrong? Are your morals somehow objectively true without feelings or opinion? I do not think that is true but I am open minded.

Can you explain if marijuana is right or wrong, moral or immoral, based on an objective moral standard? Can you demonstrate how you figure out if marijuana is wrong without using your own opinions?

I think your morality is the same as mine - subjective based on opinion and feelings. You seem to think it is objective - many Christians do. I've love to see you prove it - no has ever been able to. But I am open to being wrong.

For example the moon is objectively 1,258 miles in diameter. Energy and Mass are objectively related by E=MC2. Water objectively freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit. No opinion, no feelings - it is true for everyone.

So - can you demonstrate if marijuana use is objectively moral or immoral?

Thanks :)
 

J regia

Well-known member
Then the OP is correct, there is no moral basis for you to condemn another, like Hitler.

Getting an atheist to admit this is not easy, but I think you are consistent enough to concede it.
So where did you get your moral basis from, given that biblical morality is obviously subjective and just man-made?
 

Furion

Active member
Why would you as a Christian condemn Hitler?

I don't. Hitler's soul is for God to judge, not me.

Why would any man think he could condemn another's soul to hell?

Maybe someone else will condemn your soul to hell?

Where does it end?

No, I say it is for God to judge, He will repay. Just make sure He doesn't condemn you to hell because He is the only one who can.

Besides, maybe men have tried to condemn me to hell, and they've tried, and I got a really good advocate, Jesus will win every case that is His.

The man who turns from the love of Jesus, is the man who condemns himself. So why do it?
 

Whatsisface

Active member
I don't. Hitler's soul is for God to judge, not me.

Why would any man think he could condemn another's soul to hell?

Maybe someone else will condemn your soul to hell?

Where does it end?

No, I say it is for God to judge, He will repay. Just make sure He doesn't condemn you to hell because He is the only one who can.

Besides, maybe men have tried to condemn me to hell, and they've tried, and I got a really good advocate, Jesus will win every case that is His.

The man who turns from the love of Jesus, is the man who condemns himself. So why do it?
So you don't have a moral basis to condemn Hitler?
 
Top