Quoted: Quoted: American society wanted to do away with God and Christian morality so that folks could sleep with whoever they wanted to and not feel guilty, but the consequence of removing the judeo christian base for morality is that you remove the basis for ALL morality.  Simple unintended consequences. Jesus Christ on a popsickle stick will you shut up with this nonsense. The problem is NOT lack of God or Christianity in NO. The problem is a bunch of savages. Removing God DOES NOT remove morality. If you NEED God to BE moral (civilized) then you really are NOT moral (civilized). Apparantly if NOT for your religion you would be a murdering, rapist piece of scumbag shit. Is that what you are essentially saying?

So are people born savages?

Are these just oppressed people striking out or opportunists knowing there is no consquences for their actions?

It is actually pretty apparrent that a society held together only by laws disentigrates very quickly without law enforcement.  

Give it a break already the assumption that morality need not have a basis in relgion assumes that everyone has the same IQ and can reason.  Yes, religion controls the ignorant.  Looks like a little ignorance control was needed here, huh?

It is simple really, destroy religion and you destroy morality in the ignorant and this what you get.  Welcome real world Neo!

Given a choice of a world where only the intellegent have morals or one filled with religion and everyone has morals, I have little doubt which I would rather live in.

Tj

Quoted: Quoted: American society wanted to do away with God and Christian morality so that folks could sleep with whoever they wanted to and not feel guilty, but the consequence of removing the judeo christian base for morality is that you remove the basis for ALL morality.  Simple unintended consequences. Jesus Christ on a popsickle stick will you shut up with this nonsense. The problem is NOT lack of God or Christianity in NO. The problem is a bunch of savages. Removing God DOES NOT remove morality. If you NEED God to BE moral (civilized) then you really are NOT moral (civilized). Apparantly if NOT for your religion you would be a murdering, rapist piece of scumbag shit. Is that what you are essentially saying?

No I will not, and shame on you for asking. The loser always wants his opponent censored.  If you disagree, deal with it.  You simply don't want to hear it.  I don't demand that you shut up, nor do I implore the name of the deity I claim not to believe in,  I counter your argument.  And if we cannot agree, at least we have respectfully stated our positions.


Let me boil it down for you.  Without a Creator to define and enforce morality, all your do's and don't are merely YOUR OPINION.  I am not bound to agree with them, nor do you have the moral right to force me to follow them, even if I don't like them.

Fill in the blank where necessary:

Steyr:  hey MRW, I just saw you do ___________.  That's WRONG!
MRW:  says you.  I don't think so.  Who are you to say that what I do is wrong?
Steyr: it's not just me, EVERYBODY else in the WHOLE WORLD things ______________ is wrong.
MRW: so what?  what makes all the rest of you right and me wrong?  Maybe I'm right and all of you are wrong!  Just because there are alot of you doesn't make you right.  Maybe there is no right or wrong, maybe there just IS, or maybe what's right for me is different for what's right for you.
Steyr: maybe, if it doesn't affect somebody else, but you did ___________, and that really hurts other people!
MRW: So?  Why is hurting other people wrong?  Who says? you?  We're back to the beginning of the conversation.  I don't think hurting others is wrong, and I have the right to choose my own moral system.
Steyr: Well, it doesn't matter what you think, all the rest of us think __________ is wrong, and we're going to punish you.
MRW: you have no right to punish me, you are imposing your morality on me and that is wrong!
Steyr: says you.  I don't think so.  Who are you to say that what I do is wrong?

ad nauseum...


All morality must satisfy two basic questions:

1. justify that the moral system in question is the "correct" or "superior" system.
2. justify the right to impose that system on those that disagree.

Atheists cannot satisfy either of those two positions.

Theists CAN satisfy BOTH questions
1. Biblical morality is the superior and correct system because it has its origin OUTSIDE of man, being given  by the CREATOR. It is not a matter of man's opinion, it is the unchanging standard of God Himself, therefore it trumps every human moral system.
2. Biblical morality therefore CAN be imposed on those that do not diasgree because the authority does not come from man, but from GOD, and God has the moral authority to impose His morality on man because He is the Creator.  The Creator gets to make the rules.


ANY non-theistic moral system is merely one man's (or several's) opinion, and carries no compelling reason for others to submit to it.



So, I patiently ask the question:

SteyrAUG, you think gang raping a five year old and slitting her throat is wrong. WHY?  Give me something other than your own weak, lame opinion!
Otherwise, SHUT UP and leave the gang raping murdering pedophiles alone!!!!!



Don't you dare mention your conscience, because that apeals to the existence of a CREATOR that programmed it in there for you.  Adam and Eve ate from the tree of THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.  That's where your conscience comes from, that residual knowledge of good and evil.  But you don't believe in God or Adam and Eve, or a tree that gave forbidden knowlege, so you can't go there.

Oh, forgot something:

You can be a moral person without believing in God, because you follow your GOD GIVEN conscience.  But that's interesting that you will accept the program, but deny the Programmer.  And let me ask you this:  Have you ever done something that your conscience told you was WRONG?  Hmmm.  What do you do about THAT?  Your little internal judge banged the gavel on the podium and said "STEYR, YOU"RE BAAAD!  BAD STEYRAUG!!  "  You've broken the rules.  What's the consequence?  If there are rules, there must be a penalty for breaking them, otherwise rules are useless and silly.  Who decides what the consequence is, and how do you avoid paying it if it's too expensive?  Your conscience doesn't answer these questions, it doesn't tell you HOW TO FIX THE PROBLEM, it merely tells you THERE IS A PROBLEM.

Your conscience is merely an undeniable internal judge that points you to the Creator Himself.  He'll tell you what the consequences for breaking the rule (any rule) is <DEATH, spiritually and physically> and how to avoid paying the fine <Jesus paid it for you, if you will let Him>


Romans chapter 2 summary: "even though people have the law of God written on their heart (their conscience), they still break the rules, and therefore stand condemned before God (and need a Savoir), and those of you that DO have God's written and specific law STILL don't follow it, so you stand condemned too.  ALL the world needs a Savior"

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The problem is NOT lack of God or Christianity in NO. The problem is a bunch of savages. Removing God DOES NOT remove morality. If you NEED God to BE moral (civilized) then you really are NOT moral (civilized). Apparantly if NOT for your religion you would be a murdering, rapist piece of scumbag shit. Is that what you are essentially saying? Thanks for the insult to Christians. If you'd insulted a muslim, you'd probably be banned right now. What the man's talking about is that moral decline is a direct result of taking God out of our society. People without morals that are basically wards of the state and have been given to all their lives, don't do well in adverse circumstances. I think NO proves the point well. First off, I don't THINK SteyrAUG was IINTENDING to insult anyone, he was just calling on an illogical premiss. Dennis Rader, the one-time president of the church council at Christ Lutheran Church and Boy Scout, admitted to 10 counts of premeditated murder in the Wichita area between 1974 and 1991. He's the BTK killer (Bind, Torture, Kill) he had PLENTY of "exposure" to God, yet it seems to have done him little good. Sick is sick, depraved is depraved and such individuals should be locked up OR "disposed of", pure and simple. While I'll AGREE that people TEND to be "better" w/God in their lives, that is NO "guarantee" that they are of good character. Just as the ABSENCE of "God" and "consequences" (or the belief thereof) makes one of BAD moral character. While it CAN be a "factor"... it's just NOT an "end all and be all" I HOPE the person who said there was no "proof" of this story is CORRECT, and the story is NOT true. But I won't be holding MY breath!

Interesting you mention him.  I just moved from Wichita.  In fact I loaded the truck the day they arrested him.  I remember because I LIVED 1/2 A MILE FROM HIM and drove by his house with all the yellow tape, police vehicles and news crews.

And then when I saw his picure in the paper, I about crapped my pants.  I'VE MET THE GUY.  He wrote me a ticket for not having a dog house outside for my INSIDE dog and I talked to him in his office for 10-15 minutes, shook his hand when he dismissed the ticket.


What's the point?  A conscience is not enough.  Some folks will ignore it and do what they want anyway.  There must be an EXTERNAL, consistent, superior, and binding moral system.  Only one place to get it:

God.

you're nuts.  Everyone "making up their own theology and keeping it to themselves"  is the REASON for all this horror, or at least the reason we all sit around and wringing our hands and say "oh my, what is the world coming to?"

IDEAS HAVE CONSEQUENCES

BAD IDEAS HAVE BAD ONES.  We're reaping the bad consequences of bad ideas in NOLA.

but good ideas have good consequences.  But we can't advocate the good ideas, or even identify the bad ones, cause it's now become immoral to call a good idea good and a bad idea bad.  All ideas must be equal <cough-ignore the consequences>

Quoted: Quoted: you're nuts.  Everyone "making up their own theology and keeping it to themselves"  is the REASON for all this horror, or at least the reason we all sit around and wringing our hands and say "oh my, what is the world coming to?" IDEAS HAVE CONSEQUENCES BAD IDEAS HAVE BAD ONES.  We're reaping the bad consequences of bad ideas in NOLA. but good ideas have good consequences.  But we can't advocate the good ideas, or even identify the bad ones, cause it's now become immoral to call a good idea good and a bad idea bad.  All ideas must be equal <cough-ignore the consequences> Thanks for proving my point. Go to church, confess, and sin no more...

who said anything about church?  I'm talking about justification of moral systems with or without a Creator.  Did I mention church?  correct me if I did.  We can talk about church if you like, but that discussion usually happens after the individual concedes that there is a God, they are accountable to him, they're in trouble, Jesus privides the only way out of that trouble, and so on.

and yeah, NUTS, as in your idea is bad, evidenced by it's bad consequences, but you refuse to connect the bad consequences to the bad idea, and advocate the exact opposite solution as the one that's needed.  Supressing the truth eventually leads to futile reasoning.  you can't think straight.  Cause and effect are disconnected.  in other words, NUTS

But the fact that you only condemn me for simply making the acusation, without even bothering to justify why my posiion is wrong, proves MY point, that the only moral prehibition in America today is telling someone they're wrong.  Judging something good or bad is the cardinal sin.

and so I'll ask again,

Why is raping and murdering children wrong?

Without a Creator, you're in a quandry.  You've got only two options.  

1. admit that it really isn't wrong, and further admit that right and wrong are actually silly terms that really have no meaning because we can't objectively define them.  So go do your own thing, even if it means raping and murdering children or killing six million jews or 70 million russians, or whatever works for you, if you can get away with it.
2. Admit that there is a Creator that objectivley and authoritatively defines right and wrong.


But stop trying to say that there is right and wrong, but no Creator, because it is an intellecutally untenable position.  (foolish and indefensable)



(is indefensable a word?)