Kids & God
-
-
Alduin wrote:
There is nothing wrong with mass murder. There is nothing wrong with torturing people for fun.
You certainly don't need religion or god(s) to figure out why these might be are generally considered wrong regardless of culture or religious background.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
modified on Friday, January 2, 2009 11:40 PM to unnuance it for Bassam.
If there is no god, what is right and wrong? What is the difference between killing a human and killing a cow or a head of lettuce? Humans are simply another life form with no intrinsic rights above that of any other. Right and wrong are merely arbitrary constructs that we come up with.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
-
If there is no god, what is right and wrong? What is the difference between killing a human and killing a cow or a head of lettuce? Humans are simply another life form with no intrinsic rights above that of any other. Right and wrong are merely arbitrary constructs that we come up with.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god, what is right and wrong?
For the sake of argument let's consider that statement to be true (and for the record, I don't), then which set of right and wrong sent down from upon high by which god or gods through which prophets are the true right and wrong? They're all different and often conflict. And you lose points for saying the one true god which happens to be the one you believe in.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
-
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god, what is right and wrong?
For the sake of argument let's consider that statement to be true (and for the record, I don't), then which set of right and wrong sent down from upon high by which god or gods through which prophets are the true right and wrong? They're all different and often conflict. And you lose points for saying the one true god which happens to be the one you believe in.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
I do happen to believe in a god for several reasons, but I wasn't advocating any particular god or religion. The question was meant as it is. If there is no god what is right or wrong? By what standard do we call something good or evil, right or wrong? It loses all value if there is no reference point that we can look at.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
-
-
This is plain dumb. Sorry, but a parent has no choice but to raise a child with a belief system. You're asking him to pretend to be an atheist for 15 years. Hell, you're essentially asking him to BECOME an atheist, because kids learn far more from what they see their parents DO, than what they choose to SAY.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
Then it will be teaching, and not indoctrination.
Telling kids there is no God is indoctrinating them to atheism. There's no difference.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.
Christian Graus wrote:
Telling kids there is no God is indoctrinating them to atheism.
But telling kids that there may or may not be a God - you don't think so but other people do - is the truth. You happen to believe there is a god. But you are aware that there are many other world views - one God, many gods, no gods, scientology etc. etc. So giving your offspring the benefit of what you have learned, but with the honesty that there are many other views, is the only way.
If I knew then what I know today, then I'd know the same now as I did then - then what would be the point? .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
I do happen to believe in a god for several reasons, but I wasn't advocating any particular god or religion. The question was meant as it is. If there is no god what is right or wrong? By what standard do we call something good or evil, right or wrong? It loses all value if there is no reference point that we can look at.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god what is right or wrong?
You do talk some bollocks! What in god's name has God got to do with right and wrong? You're no talking god - you're talking a person's interpretation of what they believe their god to consider right and wrong. Some god-fearing souls believe (in certain circumstances, like when they don't agree with them) that killing people is 'right'. Bollocks bollocks bollocks.
If I knew then what I know today, then I'd know the same now as I did then - then what would be the point? .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
I do happen to believe in a god for several reasons, but I wasn't advocating any particular god or religion. The question was meant as it is. If there is no god what is right or wrong? By what standard do we call something good or evil, right or wrong? It loses all value if there is no reference point that we can look at.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god what is right or wrong? By what standard do we call something good or evil, right or wrong?
Most of the reasonable and common moral codes are common sense agreed to by the vast majority of humans. That code was invented by humans based on an innate morality that developed over our evolution (do you accept evolution?) from our social ancestors as ways to be able to live together in tribes peacefully. Gods were invented by humans to justify individuals to rule and pass judgment on those rules. Gods are an invention of humans, not the other way around.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
-
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god what is right or wrong? By what standard do we call something good or evil, right or wrong?
Most of the reasonable and common moral codes are common sense agreed to by the vast majority of humans. That code was invented by humans based on an innate morality that developed over our evolution (do you accept evolution?) from our social ancestors as ways to be able to live together in tribes peacefully. Gods were invented by humans to justify individuals to rule and pass judgment on those rules. Gods are an invention of humans, not the other way around.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
That just comes back to my original point that if there is no god right/wrong and good/evil are mere societal constructs that ultimately have no meaning. It comes down to what society wants me to do or society does not want me to do and nothing else. If society (or the vast majority of people) say that it is all right to murder or torture then it becomes right and good. I believe in micro evolution, but not macro. It has never made sense to me. Beyond that it also comes down to my main point in my first message of this topic. For things that we do not see/experience (which you have to admit our beginning as humans falls into) it comes down to a matter of trust. Do I trust this group to know what they are talking about and do I trust them to tell me the truth. When I was in school and reading and learning about evolution many of the arguments for it were based on either stuff that had proven wrong (100+ years ago) or in some cases outright lies admitted as such by those that created them 40+ years ago. Yet those were still being taught as fact and evidence for evolution. I've also spent time looking at how much we've changed our beliefs about some fundemental rules in science over the course of the years. If scientists have such a hard time figuring out how things work in the here in now why would I expect them to accurately tell me what happened long ago? I wanted to add this point as well. To be fair I do look at religion in the same way especially my own. Part of what I believe constantly causes me to question what I believe and the assumptions that I make about things.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
-
Alduin wrote:
If there is no god what is right or wrong?
You do talk some bollocks! What in god's name has God got to do with right and wrong? You're no talking god - you're talking a person's interpretation of what they believe their god to consider right and wrong. Some god-fearing souls believe (in certain circumstances, like when they don't agree with them) that killing people is 'right'. Bollocks bollocks bollocks.
If I knew then what I know today, then I'd know the same now as I did then - then what would be the point? .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
How is asking a question a lie or falsity? That doesn't make sense to me. I'll try to explain my reasoning though. If we look at the number "2" we recognize that is a symbol representing a pair of something. What if we didn't agree on the value of this symbol. What if I thought it had a value of 1, you thought it had a value of 3, another individual thought it had a value of 6 and so on and so forth. If we try to add "2" and "2" together we are each going to get a different result that is right in our own mind and wrong in the others. If it doesn't actually have a value then there is no right or wrong answer. Say we as a society say that the value of "2" is actually 4. We go from there and build different stuff based on that equation, but then several generations later they believe that the value of "2" is actually 5 instead of 4 and they try to interpret what we've done based on that and it completely screw up every calculation they try taking from us because our standards are different. When it comes to right and wrong if it isn't based on some standard then it is completely useless save as a whim of ours. If the standard is solely society as a whole then it will constantly shift and change and have little meaning save as a means of telling us what society wants us to do or not do. Maybe I didn't explain it well and maybe I'm simply confused (which happens plenty). Honestly though, if there is no god, what is right and wrong?
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
-
That just comes back to my original point that if there is no god right/wrong and good/evil are mere societal constructs that ultimately have no meaning. It comes down to what society wants me to do or society does not want me to do and nothing else. If society (or the vast majority of people) say that it is all right to murder or torture then it becomes right and good. I believe in micro evolution, but not macro. It has never made sense to me. Beyond that it also comes down to my main point in my first message of this topic. For things that we do not see/experience (which you have to admit our beginning as humans falls into) it comes down to a matter of trust. Do I trust this group to know what they are talking about and do I trust them to tell me the truth. When I was in school and reading and learning about evolution many of the arguments for it were based on either stuff that had proven wrong (100+ years ago) or in some cases outright lies admitted as such by those that created them 40+ years ago. Yet those were still being taught as fact and evidence for evolution. I've also spent time looking at how much we've changed our beliefs about some fundemental rules in science over the course of the years. If scientists have such a hard time figuring out how things work in the here in now why would I expect them to accurately tell me what happened long ago? I wanted to add this point as well. To be fair I do look at religion in the same way especially my own. Part of what I believe constantly causes me to question what I believe and the assumptions that I make about things.
Some people sail through life on a bed of roses like a knife slicing through butter.
Alduin wrote:
It comes down to what society wants me to do or society does not want me to do and nothing else.
And your view comes down to what the "society" of your religion wants you to do and nothing more.
Alduin wrote:
For things that we do not see/experience (which you have to admit our beginning as humans falls into) it comes down to a matter of trust. Do I trust this group to know what they are talking about and do I trust them to tell me the truth. When I was in school and reading and learning about evolution many of the arguments for it were based on either stuff that had proven wrong (100+ years ago) or in some cases outright lies admitted as such by those that created them 40+ years ago.
And your belief in god comes down to trust that what you're told in a bunch of ancient writing is true. You obviously are confusing real science with what is popularly written about it or passed on through the prism of religious bias. The Bible other religious books are full of inconsistencies and self contradictions and things that are blatantly impossible yet people continue to believe and refuse to accept that which is readily demonstrable.
Alduin wrote:
To be fair I do look at religion in the same way especially my own. Part of what I believe constantly causes me to question what I believe and the assumptions that I make about things.
If you have to tinker with your religious beliefs, then they're not absolute and that's your entire argument for an absolute morality. Sorry, if you're not sure it's absolute, then it's probably not. I think I've invested all I want to say here on the subject.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke