Replies

But, as a natural sentimental tendancy arising from our millions of years as veldt-dwelling social predators?

Let's assume you're right for just a second. We've evolved over millions of years from veldt-dwelling social predators. Why has slavery only become morally objectable within the last two millenia? Why has slavery been found in every culture in the history of man?

Why does murder and the use of violence to obtain things in possession of another occur in nature? Why does slavery only occur among humans?

Your candidate requires Special Knowledge, and viewing its historical track record, is a total non-starter.

You mean the will of God? How do you figure it has a poor track record?

You mean the will of God? How do you figure it has a poor track record?

Well, now, lets just take a starter sample. 1) The slaying of the Midianites & other tribes in the holy land. 2) The genocides of the Gnostics, Templars, Anabaptists, Jews and witches. 3) The signing of the accords of silence regarding the Jews by Pius the Silent, and the acts of of the Slavonic catholic church in packing the trains heading for the ovens. 4) The ritualized, sanctified kidnapping of jewish children to be raised in foreign lands as christians. 5) The wholehearted sanctification of Saracen-slaughter during the crusades, including by children.

Had enough? I'm hardly winded.

Why does murder and the use of violence to obtain things in possession of another occur in nature?

Why don't you ask a question that makes sense in context? Who cares that violence arises from nature? How is this relevant to my suggestion that it makes sense for violence by individuals to gain ends be considered immoral?

Let me just try to cut to the chase, because I'm getting impatient waiting for you to frame the usual argument: Which I'll summarize--if morals don't come from God then they are fallible.

ANS: yes, that is right, that's why having morals isn't like falling off a log, but requires a lot of educational and philosophical work, and probably won't be an incredibly rousing or thoroughgoing success regardless. How many times do creationists have to be told that the social consequences of a theory are not a valid measure of whether it is correct or not? You can't argue (persuasively) that morals must come from God, as otherwise, the're ignorable. Obviously, looking at history, they're pretty bleeding ignorable whether they come from God or not.