Violence is Inherent in Atheist Politics

_{Barry Arrington

October 10, 2017

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Progressive hero Ta-Nehisi Coates (an atheist) is conflicted about whether to bring on the guillotines. From a recent interview with Vox:

When he tries to describe the events that would erase America’s wealth gap, that would see the end of white supremacy, his thoughts flicker to the French Revolution, to the executions and the terror. ‘It’s very easy for me to see myself being contemporary with processes that might make for an equal world, more equality, and maybe the complete abolition of race as a construct, and being horrified by the process, maybe even attacking the process. I think these things don’t tend to happen peacefully.’

Materialist ideas have entailments, including (1) God does not exist; (2) good and evil do not exist as objective transcendent ontological categories; (3) God, who does not exist, cannot endow men with inalienable rights; and (4) men are not image bearers of a non-existent God; they are jumped up hairless apes.

If there is no good and evil and no God-endowed rights, by what standard does the progressive define the eponymous “progress” they claim to want to achieve? Certainly, there is no transcendent standard. The answer is that progressives want what that want. Theirs is a political philosophy bound by nothing and defined by their unbounded will to power.

Coates rejects the ideas of the Declaration of Independence. A non-existent God does not endow men with the right to life and liberty. Jumped up hairless apes have no inherent rights. So why not lop their heads off if they get in the way of Ta-Nehisi Coates’ pursuit of the greater good – i.e., Ta-Nehisi Coates’ idiosyncratic take on economic and racial justice. After all, as every tyrant from Robespierre to Pol Pot knew, you’ve got to crack a few eggs if you’re going to make an omelet.

Comments

KF @ 57: Excellent comment. Thank you!Truth Will Set You Free_{October 12, 2017
October
10
Oct
12
12
2017
07:33 AM
7
07
33
AM
PDT}

F/N: It seems the advocates of evolutionary materialist atheism need a reminder on long since well known implications of their philosophy when it intersects with the polis. Yes, known and on the record for nearly 2360 years:
Ath [in The Laws, Bk X 2,350+ ya]. . . .[The avant garde philosophers and poets, c. 360 BC] say that fire and water, and earth and air [i.e the classical "material" elements of the cosmos], all exist by nature and chance, and none of them by art . . . [such that] all that is in the heaven, as well as animals and all plants, and all the seasons come from these elements, not by the action of mind, as they say, or of any God, or from art, but as I was saying, by nature and chance only [ --> that is, evolutionary materialism is ancient and would trace all things to blind chance and mechanical necessity] . . . . [Thus, they hold] that the principles of justice have no existence at all in nature, but that mankind are always disputing about them and altering them; and that the alterations which are made by art and by law have no basis in nature, but are of authority for the moment and at the time at which they are made.-
[ --> Relativism, too, is not new; complete with its radical amorality rooted in a worldview that has no foundational IS that can ground OUGHT, leading to an effectively arbitrary foundation only for morality, ethics and law: accident of personal preference, the ebbs and flows of power politics, accidents of history and and the shifting sands of manipulated community opinion driven by "winds and waves of doctrine and the cunning craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming . . . " cf a video on Plato's parable of the cave; from the perspective of pondering who set up the manipulative shadow-shows, why.]
These, my friends, are the sayings of wise men, poets and prose writers, which find a way into the minds of youth. They are told by them that the highest right is might,
[ --> Evolutionary materialism -- having no IS that can properly ground OUGHT -- leads to the promotion of amorality on which the only basis for "OUGHT" is seen to be might (and manipulation: might in "spin") . . . ]
and in this way the young fall into impieties, under the idea that the Gods are not such as the law bids them imagine; and hence arise factions [ --> Evolutionary materialism-motivated amorality "naturally" leads to continual contentions and power struggles influenced by that amorality at the hands of ruthless power hungry nihilistic agendas], these philosophers inviting them to lead a true life according to nature, that is,to live in real dominion over others [ --> such amoral and/or nihilistic factions, if they gain power, "naturally" tend towards ruthless abuse and arbitrariness . . . they have not learned the habits nor accepted the principles of mutual respect, justice, fairness and keeping the civil peace of justice, so they will want to deceive, manipulate and crush -- as the consistent history of radical revolutions over the past 250 years so plainly shows again and again], and not in legal subjection to them [--> nihilistic will to power not the spirit of justice and lawfulness].
The horrors of C20 and the current abortion holocaust of 800+ millions and mounting up globally at a million per week did not happen in a vacuum. KF PS: Those cast into confusion or dismay by those ever so eager to deflect attention from the record of atheism and its fellow traveller ideologies by trying to taint and trash the Judaeo-Christian heritage of our civilisation, the underlying worldview of ethical theism, together with the scriptures and also to play the one sided litany game (notice, too, how soon it reached tainting the US Flag and Anthem once given free reign . . . ) may find here on helpful. PPS: JVL, have you ever personally faced the challenge of dealing with a totalitarian police state? Have you ever pondered the courage, testimony and witness of the White Rose Martyrs, as well as their fate? Did you ponder the price paid by those who composed the Barmen Declaration, and the testimony implied in Niemoller's poem, they came for? Have you ever pondered the life story of Corrie Ten Boom and many others? I think you would be well advised to reconsider your rhetoric above.kairosfocus_{October 12, 2017
October
10
Oct
12
12
2017
04:00 AM
4
04
00
AM
PDT}

@Barry Your first entailment was “God does not exist.” What is God if not an authoritative source of moral knowledge? If the goal of your “morality” isn’t to know what concrete actions we should take when faced with a moral problem, then what is it? Why should I care about it?critical rationalist_{October 12, 2017
October
10
Oct
12
12
2017
03:11 AM
3
03
11
AM
PDT}

From https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005206
The general tactic by the leadership of both Protestant and Catholic churches in Germany was caution with respect to protest and compromise with the Nazi state leadership where possible. There was criticism within both churches of Nazi racialized ideology and notions of "Aryanism," and movements emerged in both churches to defend church members who were considered "non-Aryan" under Nazi racial laws (e.g., Jews who had converted). Yet throughout this period there was virtually no public opposition to antisemitism or any readiness by church leaders to publicly oppose the regime on the issues of antisemitism and state-sanctioned violence against the Jews. There were individual Catholics and Protestants who spoke out on behalf of Jews, and small groups within both churches that became involved in rescue and resistance activities (for example, the White Rose and Herman Maas).
JVL_{October 12, 2017
October
10
Oct
12
12
2017
01:04 AM
1
01
04
AM
PDT}

There is a fondness at this site for poo-pooing the Crusades, Muslim expansion, the Inquisition, the fact most NAZIS were Catholic or Protestant, India has always been Theistic (largely still is), and the world population largely begs to live in theistic chains. Then of course after ridiculing historic fact, (the world's history is largely theisitc and violent), blaming all violence on the usual suspects, Stalin, Mao, and Christian Germany, and Buddhist Japan, and Catholic Italy: Whoops! I'm sorry, someone please refute this fact: Up until just a few hundred years ago, the majority of decision making, power, and law making rights resided in the hands of Clerics in Cahoots with Kings. Isn't this one of the most oft repeated reasons for the founding of the USA? No more Church, and the choice to worship not at all. Although it must be said the colonies did slip back into persecution mode almost immediately.rvb8_{October 12, 2017
October
10
Oct
12
12
2017
12:20 AM
12
12
20
AM
PDT}

drc466 - Atheistic cultures always result in mass murders and eventually give way to religious cultures of higher morality and greater individual freedom. Always. Western Europe, which was blood soaked for centuries, is becoming more and more secular and peaceful. Church affiliation is decreasing and theistically motivated laws are being altered. Individual freedom is arguably at an all-time high. I'm not sure you can clearly argue that Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot's regimes were replaced with 'religious cultures of higher morality and greater individual freedom.' It's hard to see that the political climate of China has changed much at all. Ninety-five percent of Cambodians are Buddhist . . . is that really theistic? Stalin died in 1953 . . . I don't recall the Soviet Union all of a sudden becoming theistic after that but maybe I missed something. Is the Russian government theistic now? Also, it's pretty clear, that except for some wing-nut, gun-hoarding Americans quite a lot of terrorism these days is perpetrated by theistically motivated regimes and individuals. I can think of only one overtly belligerent non-theistic nation and that's North Korea. I'd also like to point out that the religious persecution perpetrated by Christian nations during the Crusades (in and out of Europe), the Jewish Pogroms and the Inquisition went on for centuries. It transcended individual rulers and was fully sanctioned by the Catholic Church. There is absolutely no question that during the Albigensian Crusade Christians slaughtered other Christians over a difference in doctrine. Just because it was a while ago doesn't mean it matters less.JVL_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
10:47 PM
10
10
47
PM
PDT}

drc466 - Heh – very nice. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion based on a supreme being, perfect creation, an evil anti-god, and a fall from perfection. Sound familiar? You asked for a non-Christian example. And, as you must know, one that predates Christianity by quite a while.JVL_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
09:45 PM
9
09
45
PM
PDT}

1. Of all the people renown for bringing peace to this world, how many have been atheists? 2. Of all the people renown for killing large numbers of people, how many have been atheists? Replace atheist with whatever other ideology. The ideology that maximizes 1 and minimizes 2 is the best. It certainly is not atheism.EricMH_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
09:07 PM
9
09
07
PM
PDT}

Materialist ideas have entailments, including (1) God does not exist;
I wouldn't say that materialism necessarily excludes the possibility of the existence of a God.
(2) good and evil do not exist as objective transcendent ontological categories
That's right. Good and evil are more like judgements we make, usually about human acts. There doesn't seem to be anything like The Force from Star Wars with a Light and Dark Side.
(3) God, who does not exist, cannot endow men with inalienable rights;
Again, that's right. We have to define, grant and uphold them ourselves.
(4) men are not image bearers of a non-existent God; they are jumped up hairless apes.
Does God have a belly-button?
If there is no good and evil and no God-endowed rights, by what standard does the progressive define the eponymous “progress” they claim to want to achieve?
Longer happier, healthier lives? Freedom from want, freedom from hunger, freedom from persecution, freedom to pursue whatever makes one happy as long as it does not cause harm to others? The same sort of things that most ordinary human beings would want whether progressive or retrogressive.
Certainly, there is no transcendent standard
Nope. But why should that matter?
Theirs is a political philosophy bound by nothing and defined by their unbounded will to power.
As far as I am aware, there is not a single admitted atheist in the Congress of the United States, which implies that Christians have their hands on the levers of power in the most powerful country in the world. So what were you saying about an "unbounded will to power"?
After all, as every tyrant from Robespierre to Pol Pot knew, you’ve got to crack a few eggs if you’re going to make an omelet.
And, as I pointed out before, the Old Testament records a lot of eggs being cracked there too.Seversky_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:55 PM
8
08
55
PM
PDT}

ronvanwegen @ 10
Seversky@8: “If you want me to respect your interests then you must respect mine.” You “must”? Where’d you get that from? If you don’t respect my interests I’m gonna kill you. That’s all there is in your world.
No, that's the basis of Christian morality. Do as God says or it's eternal hellfire and damnation. Certainly, if someone threatens my life or that of another I might feel I have no alternative but to kill to prevent that happening but it's far better if we can all agree that "I'll respect your rights if you respect mine" is a much better way. Is that so hard to achieve?Seversky_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:28 PM
8
08
28
PM
PDT}

Dean_from_Ohio @ 8
It's the kind of morality where everyone unashamedly and immediately agrees that torturing babies for fun is ALWAYS a monstrous evil. It’s the kind of morality where soldiers, police and firefighters die, when necessary, that others may live. It’s the kind of morality where a mother makes the considered decision to forego chemotherapy so that the child she carries may have life, even if that means the mother’s own cancer will be beyond treatment after the child is born. It’s the kind of morality where the first President of the United States steps down after two terms so that the nation’s liberty, won at such great cost, might long endure. It’s the kind of morality where a baby with Downs and a great grandmother with Alzheimer’s are welcomed in life and protected in law
None of which depend on Christian belief.
It’s the kind of morality where people who know God tolerate and even love those who are boorish, selfish and even violent, who put themselves in the place of God and pretend their boorish, selfish and violent world view is superior to the God who so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life
A physical body may or may not have been executed but Jesus, as the Son of God, is held to be as immortal as His Father. No human had or has the power to harm Him so the crucifixion was at best a symbolic gesture and, at worst, just street theater, the morality of which is questionable.Seversky_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:20 PM
8
08
20
PM
PDT}

@45 The sexual abuse within the Catholic Church, and many, many other churches, is real...Ireland went from being one of the most Catholic countries in the world to the least within a decade because of the cover-up of sexual abuse by the church...so it must be real... If you think this is not a big deal, I hope you can appreciated that most of the victims of the abuse either attempted or think about attempting a suicide...Many of them have been successful... Many of the victims' families find out about the abuse either when the victim is dead, or attempted a suicide because of the shame they feel and in many cases nobody believed them that"... a holy man of God would do it to an innocent child..." I have seen the effects of the abuse first hand...J-Mac_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
07:33 PM
7
07
33
PM
PDT}

@44 Both side have to deal with their demons... Atheists have had Stalin, Mao and others that exterminated millions in their name of their ideology; godless one... Theists had the holy wars and the support for Hitler for the "better good" either to spread Christianity or to protect it from the atheistic Bolsheviks...The question haunts many Christians to today; Is that what Christian God wanted his followers to do? Yes? No?J-Mac_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
07:21 PM
7
07
21
PM
PDT}

JVL @39, Heh - very nice. Zoroastrianism is a monotheistic religion based on a supreme being, perfect creation, an evil anti-god, and a fall from perfection. Sound familiar? rvb8, Lol - your posts are always good for a laugh. Atheistic cultures always result in mass murders and eventually give way to religious cultures of higher morality and greater individual freedom. Always.
1.) Through out human history, in any culture, the standard human politics was, Aristocratic supported by Theistic priesthoods of some flavour.
Okay. Remember this when we get to #4 & #5 below.
2.) Although atheists have always existed, (the Bible acknowledges this uncomfortable fact, with the lines, “A fool in his heart…”), they have only very, very, recently had a chance of a political say.
Again, okay, and remember this (foreshadowing, can you feel it?)
3.) Because 99% of human history is Theistic, all political deaths up to today, are decisions made by Theistic governments.
You're on a roll! Two fails here: First, you are treating all religions the same. Second, you don't really have any idea what % of all deaths are political.
4.) Theisim is the most violent form of government ever conceived by man.
Logic Fail. On what basis? percent of population? By number of years during which violence occurred? Absolute quantity of deaths?
5.) Now that rational, Atheistic/Humanist/Matrialistic government is finally being heard, humans can now live to be over 70years, without fear of death by Theism.
LOGIC FAIL! As you've already stated, we only have a handful of Atheistic/Humanistic/Materialistic governments on record, all within the 20th Century. And every one, every single one, was more violent and caused more death, suffering and persecution of its citizens, than any of the comparable 20th Century religious governments. (Oh, and the "over 70years" is a non-sequitir - unless you can prove that our life spans are the direct results of Communist inventions and interventions). You do have one point, though - the 70million plus who died to Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. were probably not very worried about "death by Theism"!
6.) The Theistic regimes that remain on our planet, remain backward, violent, repressive, and childish.
LOGIC FAIL #2: Technically, the modern regimes of the U.S. and Europe are still "Theistic regimes" if we are still using your criteria from 1-3 above. Even at the height of Catholicism's power, the church was separate from the secular government (i.e. a state religion, not the state). So by this criteria, you believe that the U.S. and Europe are "backward, violent, repressive, and childish". Any method you would use to distinguish the U.S. and Europe as non-Theistic regimes would also disqualify...most governments throughout history. "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's..."
7.) Thank god for Atheism.
Okay, that's funny. +1 to you. I'll meet you in the middle - all non-Judeo-Christian religions suffer from logical and moral flaws that make me not believe them - how's that? Seems like that would be something we can agree on!drc466_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
06:13 PM
6
06
13
PM
PDT}

rvb8@ 40 I wouldn't go as far as you have with some of your assessments, but it is always interesting to hear the other side of the issue; as atheists see it... I come from a Catholic family. My uncles served in the army during the II world war... When one of my uncles died, I got a hold of his diary. It was old, damaged, the paper was yellow and his handwriting mainly illegible. I became determined to have it restored. When I did, maybe 75-80% of it, I learned shocking things about my uncle's war experiences and his PTSD after that... His main confusion about the war was that Christians were fighting on both sides of the conflict. Furthermore, because our family was scattered all over the world before the war, including Germany, it was likely, that he was fighting against his own "flesh and blood"... I came to a conclusion, that he took someones life, maybe more than one, and could not live with himself because of the guilt... He was an alcoholic who spent most of his life trying to forget the II world war experiences, the confusion it caused and the mental scars that could not heal...J-Mac_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
03:49 PM
3
03
49
PM
PDT}

Don @41, "The admonition of 'no other gods' fits your Atheist world view quite nicely." No, it doesn't. 'No other gods...‘, implies One remaining. That is not atheism, as atheism doesn't like the remaining One either. Also, referencing your own writing, in defence of your own position, is poor scholarship. Also I note an uncomfortable fact @40, Points 1.) and 3.). The first is that human history was dominated by the religious decision makers until very, very recently. And second, therefore, those responsible for the death of all humans for 99% of human history, were the religious. Also, I notice you put Mohummed in with Hitler and Stalin; Why? He's part of YOUR Abrahamic tradition. Also, you seem to have a soft spot for the King James Protestant flavour of Chrisitianity, again, Why? Do you not realise that as an atheist I evaluate all quackery by the same standards; Scientific/Materialism!?rvb8_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
03:42 PM
3
03
42
PM
PDT}

rvb8 -- I'll reference my remarks @20 with an excerpt from my article at: https://ayearningforpublius.wordpress.com/2015/01/09/islamjihad-and-the-ten-commandments/ " Why would God declare “You shall have no other gods before me” To answer this takes me on a two pronged visit to history and to current events. As I said earlier, the atheist is correct in claiming that man has created gods and not the other way around. Further, the atheist is correct in claiming that religion has caused more death and suffering than any other cause in human history … but ah … wait a minute here – that is perhaps correct up until the time the atheist got his turn at the seat of power and became the high priest of the atheist brand of religion. I speak here of the twentieth century and the rise of Communism with Atheism as one of its principle pillars of ‘truth.’ It is estimated that some 100,000,000 – that is 100 million – people died during the horrific 70+ year run of atheist Communism throughout the world. Some historians have estimated that this body count laid at the feet of Atheistic Communism is on the order of 7 to 10 times that of all of the wars that can legitimately be laid at the feet of Christianity – and factor in the 70 years of Communism vs. 2000 years of Christianity. And the Jews during these past 2000 years? Primarily scattered and mercilessly persecuted throughout the world and thus not a factor in the abuses of religion – except as victims. What the Bible is describing, anticipating and warning of, in the sense of “other gods” takes on flesh in the form of those of history who would set themselves up as gods, or the emissaries of the gods they have set up. The mindset of such (typically) men have cause untold havoc, death and suffering over the centuries. Men such as the Pharaohs of Egypt, the kings of Babylon, the Khans, the Caesars, Mohammed, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot … the multi-generational Jong clan of North Korea come to mind. Though many of this ilk operate as cults of personality rather than a more formalized ‘religious’ structure, they nevertheless demand the obedience and adoration required of gods. This is the calamity and havoc which Exodus 20 warns of. ... " This admonition of "no other gods" fits your Atheist world view quite nicely.DonJohnsonDD682_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
03:26 PM
3
03
26
PM
PDT}

J-Mac @35, "I have to admit that I'm confused about this op and some of the comments here..." That is standard Barry. When he writes a post that is so obviously unjustifiable, 'Atheist Politics is Violent', he is well aware such a topic gives him maximum leeway to bafflegab. There are simple facts: 1.) Through out human history, in any culture, the standard human politics was, Aristocratic supported by Theistic priesthoods of some flavour. 2.) Although atheists have always existed, (the Bible acknowledges this uncomfortable fact, with the lines, "A fool in his heart..."), they have only very, very, recently had a chance of a political say. 3.) Because 99% of human history is Theistic, all political deaths up to today, are decisions made by Theistic governments. 4.) Theisim is the most violent form of government ever conceived by man. 5.) Now that rational, Atheistic/Humanist/Matrialistic government is finally being heard, humans can now live to be over 70years, without fear of death by Theism. 6.) The Theistic regimes that remain on our planet, remain backward, violent, repressive, and childish. 7.) Thank god for Atheism.rvb8_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
03:05 PM
3
03
05
PM
PDT}

drc466 - Let’s take a simple one – equality of all mankind. Is that found in any current non-Christian, or historical pre-Christian, culture? And if so, what is the underlying ideology – is it atheistic/materialistic? ZoroastrianismJVL_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
02:24 PM
2
02
24
PM
PDT}

UD: Yeah, like atheist Coates getting all wistful for the Terror YESTERDAY.

UD: Said the idiot the day after an atheist got all wistful for the Terror.

UD: Uh, I haven’t called for The Terror v. 2.0. That’s your boy Coates.
Have you listened to the podcast? If not you can find it here. The stuff about the French revolution starts at 52.26. There's no fast-forward slider on the built-in player, so you can use the download button and skip forward on your local media player if you don't want to listen to the whole podcast. In short, he seems to be saying the opposite of what Barry claims: He says he would like to see a world without racism and would like it to be brought around by peaceful means. But historically, the processes that bring about such changes tend to be more violent. If he were present while the processes were happening he might find them to be so horrific that he might attack them even though they led to a better world -- precisely because he opposes undue violence. Of course, I am paraphrasing to show what I understood his words to mean. Barry obviously got something completely different from them. Listen to the podcast and decide for yourselves.steve_h_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
01:11 PM
1
01
11
PM
PDT}

Objective moral values follow necessarily from theism-- the worldview that an eternally existing transcendent mind (God) is the ultimate cause of all other existence. Objective moral values do not follow necessarily from atheistic naturalism/materialism. If they did atheists would be able to give an argument that they do. IOW atheism does not provide a basis for morality, ethics or universal human rights. Even many naturalists agree with me here– E.O. Wilson, William Provine, Joel Marks, Alex Rosenberg, Michael Ruse, J. L. Mackie… to name a few. It’s the fact that objective moral values follow necessarily from God’s existence that we can turn around and use as evidence for His existence. It is what we would expect if God really exists. Maybe that’s why a lot of atheist reject even the possibility of objective moral values. They are contemptuous of even the idea of God existing. The problem is the existence of God does not depend on the belief of finite self-conscious beings. If He exists certain facts follow from His existence. One of those facts is the fact of moral truth.john_a_designer_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
12:41 PM
12
12
41
PM
PDT}

The pope protested the Iraq invasion, he speaks for the entire Catholic Church. Also, the point is not that no atheists are pacifists. It is that they have no reason to be pacifists, besides personal preference. The Christian, on the other hand, has a duty to be a peacemaker. When he is fostering violence, he is not following Christ. Mother Teresa is just as consistent with atheist morality as Hitler, but only one of the two is consistent with Christian morality.EricMH_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
12:40 PM
12
12
40
PM
PDT}

I have to admit that I'm confused about this OP and some of the comments here... However, to be fair, looking back in not so remote history, who the pacifist movement consisted of? Where there no atheists protesting against war violence? I can't recall any mainstream religions objecting to recent war violence... other than a handful of evangelical Christians featured in Hacksaw Ridge movie...J-Mac_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT}

rvb8 & Seversky,
We do not say atheists cannot be good. Of course they can, especially in a culture like ours where they can take a free ride on centuries of Christian moral capital.

Nietzsche’s point is this. If you say you don’t believe in God but you do believe in the rights of every person and the requirement to care for all the weak and the poor, then you are still holding on to Christian beliefs, whether you will admit it or not.
As I have commented before on this site, and as is pointed out above, your accusations against Christianity still sit within a framework set by Christian ideology. My challenge to you is to provide us a non-Christian referent for a civilization that is equal to or improves on Western civilization, where Christian morality essentially "won", even among non-practicing Christians. College professors aren't "nice chaps" who believe in "good morals" in a vacuum - they are considered "nice" and "good" because they have internalized and reflect the general Judeo-Christian ethic that (for awhile at least) still reigns supreme in 1st world countries. Can you point to an atheistic, or Islamic, or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc., culture (where the religion dictates the mores of the culture, as opposed to being a sub-culture in the broader Judeo-Christian values of the culture), that has the same basic morals that you two inherently accept as "good"? Let's take a simple one - equality of all mankind. Is that found in any current non-Christian, or historical pre-Christian, culture? And if so, what is the underlying ideology - is it atheistic/materialistic? Until you can, all your blatherings about extreme outliers such as the excesses of the later Crusades, or the internal-to-the-church Inquisitions, are what's known as majoring on the minors - whereas pointing out the genocides, cannibalism, tribalism and slavery inherent to non-Christian/atheistic ideologies is known as majoring on the majors.drc466_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
11:13 AM
11
11
13
AM
PDT}

I understand that most a/mats are against mass murder, etc., but what I don't understand is why they think that attitude is (or should be) the default position for human beings under the Darwinian evolutionary model.Truth Will Set You Free_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
10:59 AM
10
10
59
AM
PDT}

Besides supporting subjective or "my opinion" morality I didn't see yet an atheists mention their other favorite: a bandwagon morality ie whatever we decide as society at the moment those are our moral values.Eugen_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
10:45 AM
10
10
45
AM
PDT}

When a tiger kills the cubs of the rival male so he can mate with the female, he has not done anything immoral. He's just being a tiger. If we are just evolved apes, there is no morality for us anymore than there is for the tiger, why in the world would any one expect racial equality in a world where evolution's racial favoritism is entirely random? Should not the strongest race enslave the weakest in Darwin's world? Where does the morality come from that says otherwise? From nature? Yes, let's take morality from the tiger. Why this is so hard to understand for materialists, is the real question of the day.Florabama_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
10:08 AM
10
10
08
AM
PDT}

@rvb8 & jvl, you must distinguish between atheists and atheism. There are plenty of moral atheists. But, atheism does not provide reason for their morality. Theism does. When a theist wants to justify genocide and slavery, he has to twist his beliefs. When an atheist wants to do the same, there is no contradiction with his beliefs. That's why all atheist states have committed genocide, but only some theists have, and in particular violent Christians receive much opposition from their own people. It is Christians who ended the religious wars in Europe and ended slavery in the West.EricMH_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:56 AM
8
08
56
AM
PDT}

Sev, You say, "As for morality, of course it’s subjective. How could it be anything else?" Is that a subjective statement or is it an absolute statement? Isn't that very statement an absolute moral statement since you are defining what morality we should follow? If you are correct about morality then there is no real morality. Only your opinion. Just own it if that's what you believe.ellijacket_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:07 AM
8
08
07
AM
PDT}

CR @ 27: The argument you summarize and attribute to me is one I've never made. (If I am wrong, I defy you to post a link to where I argued this way) I guess that makes you a liar.Barry Arrington_{October 11, 2017
October
10
Oct
11
11
2017
08:00 AM
8
08
00
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 … 4 5 6 7 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply