Moral judgements from within a universe that has "chance" as its only guiding principle have no weight to carry with them. If we're all just a bunch of organized gasses anyway why should your comments have any more weight than a single quark?
Please leave the moral judgments to those who understand the universe is predicated on principles of design and purpose.
Why? Those who don't hold to a belief in a higher power have to live here too. Indeed, as humans are by nature social critters, and as social critters need ground rules governing their interactions with one-another (or else the social grouping falls apart and the members get eaten by bigger, meaner critters), it stands to reason that basic ground rules (morality) would come into being even without the intervention of the Divine.
Please leave the moral judgments to those who understand the universe is predicated on principles of design and purpose.
You are only succeeding in this post and the previous couple of posts in showing your blatant NEED for religion. However, there are many here on this thread who have no such need and are perfectly happy without it. The absence of a god in this universe would not stop morality from existing. Morality is universal and absolute. Right is right with a god or no god. You have made it clear that you would not be able to live without your beliefs, but the fact that so many do not follow your beliefs and still function as moral members of society shows that people can base their morality on something other than Christianity, or Judaism, or Buddhism, or Islam (thank god!).
Oh, you mean like the Pope, and Martin Luther, who both slaghtered the European Anabaptists down to the last woman and child? Like the Slovokian priests and clerics who helped Hitler pack the death trains? Have a care whom you appoint to high moral office.
Chance is not a principle, much less a guiding principle. Taken in broad strokes, chance, or a chaotic universe, is a dynamic system, which will respond to the laws it inherents from it's inception. Moral judgements arise from human concerns, as best I am able to detect. Your argument make the a priori assumption that morality arises from some source outside human concerns--you assume the victory of your argument to make your argument.
Moral judgements from within a universe that has "chance" as its only guiding principle have no weight to carry with them. -fc-
That's an almost godlike pronouncement, fester, imo.
Men make "moral judgements" on their peers. -- Chance in the universe has no connection to mans 'morality' that I can see.
Please leave the moral judgments to those who understand the universe is predicated on principles of design and purpose. -fc-
Again fester, you seem to imply that YOU have some special insight into understanding our universe, and mans moral actions. Is this true? -- Should we kneel?