Posted on 09/16/2014 5:53:57 AM PDT by Heartlander
First, nihilism cant condemn Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or those who fomented the Armenian genocide or the Rwandan one. If there is no such thing as morally forbidden, then what Mohamed Atta did on September 11, 2001, was not morally forbidden. Of course, it was not permitted either. But still, dont we want to have grounds to condemn these monsters? Nihilism seems to cut that ground out from under us.Second, if we admit to being nihilists, then people wont trust us. We wont be left alone when there is loose change around. We wont be relied on to be sure small children stay out of trouble.
Third, and worst of all, if nihilism gets any traction, society will be destroyed. We will find ourselves back in Thomas Hobbess famous state of nature, where the life of man is solitary, mean, nasty, brutish and short. Surely, we dont want to be nihilists if we can possibly avoid it. (Or at least, we dont want the other people around us to be nihilists.)
Scientism cant avoid nihilism. We need to make the best of it. For our own self-respect, we need to show that nihilism doesnt have the three problems just mentionedno grounds to condemn Hitler, lots of reasons for other people to distrust us, and even reasons why no one should trust anyone else. We need to be convinced that these unacceptable outcomes are not ones that atheism and scientism are committed to. Such outcomes would be more than merely a public relations nightmare for scientism. They might prevent us from swallowing nihilism ourselves, and that would start unraveling scientism.
To avoid these outcomes, people have been searching for scientifically respectable justification of morality for least a century and a half. The trouble is that over the same 150 years or so, the reasons for nihilism have continued to mount. Both the failure to find an ethics that everyone can agree on and the scientific explanation of the origin and persistence of moral norms have made nihilism more and more plausible while remaining just as unappetizing.
- A.Rosenberg, The Atheist Guide to Reality, ch.5
The religious have never been forceful enough in pushing back against the argument that their political views are bad for women. Christianity affords women their deserved respect for the role they play, atheism offers them animalism.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,...
Not an atheist, but I am honest. This entire article is based on a woman coming forward *five*years* after the fact, accusing a renown skeptic to getting her drunk to take advantage of her. There have been several incidents where feminists have played the ‘rape card’ with ZERO evidence, tried to ruin a man’s reputation, then cried when the court of public opinion declined to ruin him and then screamed ‘misogyny!’
This ‘anti-woman’ thing is a fight with feminism vs. atheism because the whiny little girls want to take over the atheist movement and make it part of their PC BS and the larger movement isn’t having it.
Here’s an article written about the incident that tries to do just that, but does hit the salient points.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/markoppenheimer/will-misogyny-bring-down-the-atheist-movement#2iq1jmg
(There are five parts to the following series, if anyone’s interested. You can find it on thunderfoot’s youtube page. Here’s part one)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKKQdJR7F_I
As usual, anyone who doesn’t swallow feminism’s dogma is labeled a misogynist and attacked relentlessly.
I’ve got a lot of issues with atheism, but not cooperating with PC feminist ideology is not one of them. (I hate feminism MUCH more than I’m at all concerned about atheism.)
Due process and privacy until actual conviction all the way around. It is far too easy to have destruction by accusation (on both sides of the equation).
Yes - that is the article they are referring to and linked in the first sentence.
So, atheism is evolving into Islam?
Well, they both seem to worship the same god
The buzzfeed article is so interesting. A self professed group “comprising atheists, agnostics, debunkers of pseudoscience, and others promoting rationalism over superstition, and reason over religion” would be having a family feud so similar, in so many ways, to the religious family feud.
That is what you call irony.
Sorry! Had ten tabs open and grabbed one.
Seriously, I refuse to condemn a group for refusing to crucify men and ban them from events based on rumors. (No. He’s not the only one. The feminists have a hit list. Sometimes they don’t even know the names of women who the man supposedly ‘raped’... just ‘oh, everybody knows he’s a rapist.’)
There’s plenty of other reasons to condemn atheism. This is not one.
“This anti-woman thing is a fight with feminism vs. atheism because the whiny little girls want to take over the atheist movement and make it part of their PC BS and the larger movement isnt having it.”
Did you read the buzzfeed article you quoted?
Randi; “His reply, Randi continued, is he had a bit too much to drink and he doesnt remember. I dont know Ive never been drunk in my life. Its an unfortunate thing I havent seen him doing that. But I get the word from people in the organization that he has to be under better control. If he had gotten violent, Id have him out of there immediately. Ive just heard that he misbehaved himself with the women, which I guess is what men do when they are drunk.
Randi is gay so he probably doesn’t understand the man/woman dynamic.
I’m with Amy on this one, I know a lot of men are jerks that would take advantage of a drunk young woman. The woman being a feminist or not isn’t a factor in that reality.
The article is so ironic because it shows the “enlightened” have exactly the same warts and feuds their despised religious counterparts have.
What’s funny is atheists like to claim they’re all rationality and logic. But their worldview ultimately is an evolutionary worldview. And their worldview ultimately declares belief in spontaneous generation, that life sprang from lifeless chemicals. But that is a faith statement, since there’s zero scientific evidence for life springing from lifeless chemicals.
Even the most “simple” single-celled organism is stupendously complex, such that it’s laughable to claim spontaneous generation as a fact. Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation a century ago with the Law of Biogenesis. Even the production of a single usable protein via random processes has been likened to a solar system full of blind men all simultaneously solving the Rubik’s Cube. And that “simple” single-celled organism has dozens of them, as well as organelles, cytoplasm, a nucleus complete with DNA and a variably permeable cell membrane. Yet they have faith (and zero scientific evidence) that all that created itself!
“Christianity affords women their deserved respect for the role they play”
Leftist/liberal women are in rebellion to this “role” so they choose anti-Christianity as their worldview.
“your desire will be for your husband”
meaning his role.
This is all part of the curse after the fall, and to be expected.
And why should an atheist/materialist be angry about someone “misbehaving”?
Exactly. They have no standard, other than opinion, to apply to any behavior.
Herman. Cain.
It drives ‘em nuts, too, when you ask them to explain why their opinion of right and wrong is “better” than opinions to the contrary.
If they are intellectually capable of understanding this question, they will realize that something objective must be applied or they are simply relying on another opinion to judge the value of contrasting opinions.
I don’t have the impression Alison Smith is a stereotypical man hating hit-list wielding Gloria Steinem feminist. But that’s aside from what I found most interesting about the article.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUSMi7EyMQw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKdvzSADayM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sI5PEGgac0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgxwPU0W-Wg
Back in 2009, you took advantage of me. You cornered me in an elevator, touched yourself, then took me back to your room and had sex with me. I was too drunk to really remember anything.
Now, according to your own criteria, that is enough to convict you in the court of public opinion. You should have your career and reputation ripped to shreds. Anyone who questions the claim that I just made is a woman-hating misogynist. You should be shunned by your friends and never again invited to a professional function. I’ll bet that I can find a half a dozen other women who ‘remember’ you being a jerk and hitting on them inappropriately. (The more famous that you are, the easier it is to find names.)
And, because some men do take advantage of women who are drunk, it must be true. Women *never* lie about such a thing. Women never confabulate and exaggerate about rape/sexual harassment.
I used to work with a rape crisis center. I definitely saw real victims. But I also saw women who ‘weren’t sure’ if they’d been raped or not. I’d see a woman who began as mildly irritated as she told her story and watch as the ‘counselors’ absolutely convinced her that she’d been raped. I heard the stories morph as she ‘began to remember things’ that she hadn’t remember before. It was nothing less than brainwashing.
I also saw women referred to us who had actually reported. Even when they *admitted* that it hadn’t happened and that she was just out for revenge, they encouraged her to keep going forward and told her that she was in denial. (Some of these women realized that they really screwed up and wanted to recant, but the counselors would push them to go through with the process.)
This is why I left and one of the many reasons that I despise feminism. They do promote a victim mentality in women and a mistrust of all men.
We have a legal system for a reason, people. I will not accept vigilante justice or condemn a man who hasn’t been tried and convicted in a court of law.
(And let’s not forget the daycare/child molestation scandal that turned out to be complete hysteria. Lives were ruined by that incident and NOTHING happened.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.