Posted on 11/12/2008 6:35:41 AM PST by GOPToad
One does not need to have religious faith to believe in the dignity of human beings, and that an unborn child fits in that category.
Well get someone at it - needs a figurehead in this case though to speak to the media - someone with respect in the community and not necessarily a religious leader. I know it’s easy to mouth of from Australia but as the USA goes so do we eventually in both good and bad things I am afraid.
Mel
Two Words - Spray paint - LOL - know any graffiti artists who could turn it into a pro-christian message?
This will probably get the Feds around! Sorry have to go there’s someone at the d................. ouch!
Mel
“I don’t seem to have a problem figuring out how to keep on people’s good side and stay out of trouble.”
Well that’s good for you - I suppose it has nothing to do with being brought up in a Judeo Christian country. I suppose you see no difference then in what you do and what a Muslim would do in another country. It’s all a bit relative to you!
“Look Ahamed there’s a pretty goat and nobody will mind as long as we don’t get on anybody’s bad side and get into trouble.”
Even though a lot of Christians tend to nitpick other people, good and evil are fairly obvious because we have been countries that reflected God’s Law - now we are changing to into countries where their is no Absolute Truth just the truth of the individual - all evil is possible from there.
Mel
Without God and his commandments, how do you even define “good”?
Relative moralism and no absolute truth is the way of the humanists.
______
Atheists survive by denying reality. Their universe denies the very goodness they claim to desire.
Your problem as a religionist is figuring out precisely which of the hundreds of thousands of religions in the world has the EXACT truth. You have no more skills to do this than I do in figuring out the right thing to do.
__________________
OOOOOOOOOH. WONDERFUL.
You assume that religions are relative to each other. (which they are) You then equate religion with reality.
We do not choose reality. We may choose to deny reality. (which you do) Your very denial establishes absolute truth as that against which you rail.
Your argument is a tautology. You cannot validate your position without reference to reason and truth, both of which you deny.
Make all the claims you like. They are meaningless by your own tenents.
Does anybody have this guy's e-mail? He needs a few dissenting messages sent his way.
One needs to be brought up in a Judeo-Christian country to be moral? I suppose that you'd consider the Koreans or the Japanese immoral, but they care more about the cars they built for me than Hophead Willie over in Detroit did in 1982.
I suppose you see no difference then in what you do and what a Muslim would do in another country.
Not all Muslims are immoral, it's just that 99% of them give the rest a bad name.
Seriously, some of them have a very benign form of Islam, I'm thinking of the folks over in Turkey that some of my friends who served on US military bases over there got to know.
Mel, the trouble with religion is you have to pick the interpretation of various sets of old books (that were verbal traditions long before they were written) that tells you what you can eat, what you can drink, and how you can entertain yourself. There's no "absolute" guide to figuring out which one of them is "right", or else everybody in the Judeo-Christian nations would be in the same sect.
Even the term "Judeo-Christian" is shorthand for "a temporary alliance we're willing to make until we have vanquished our enemies". If Jews and Christians didn't have atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. to oppose, they'd be at each other's throats. Oh, wait, that's happened several million times over just the last century.
The same skill set you and everybody else used to pick and stick with a religion, I use in figuring out how to be a moral individual. I just do a bit more of my own thinking rather than substituting a voice from a pulpit.
One does not need to have religious faith to believe in the dignity of human beings, and that an unborn child fits in that category.
______________
Actually it is impossible to believe in the dignity of anything if you reject the concept of dignity. By denying absolute truth there is no ground for holding one opinion above another. Dignity, then, for a moral relativist, has no more value than indignity.
Yes, and it's impossible to believe in the evolution of things, if you reject the concept of evolution. You see how circular your argument looks?
Mr. Merriam and Mr. Webster put it thusly: "the quality or state of being worthy, honored, or esteemed". No mention of a supreme being in there. I can esteem the life of an animal, more so if it is my pet (that I would spend money to save the life of), less so if it is my food (that I would desire be killed with a minimum of suffering).
Same's true of persons, I can deem an unborn human being worthy, because of it's innocence, and I can deem a capital criminal unworthy because of his guilt.
From the outside looking in I totally understand your point of view. There is no way for me to to expalin what it is like to have an epiphany or meeting with God or whatever anyone would like to call it and the certainty that comes from experiencing that. What I will say is that the Bible seems to understand the nature of man extremely well(a discerner of the heart and soul as it puts it) and it works when put into practise.
I tend not to put my judgement of good and evil on individuals as I have not walked a mile in their shoes but I am quite within my rights to judge others actions. Trends or societies are easier to judge as it is easier to see the fruit of their beliefs on a wider scale.
I do know a lot of Muslims and many are wonderful people but I do judge their religion harshly as to what it produces and what most of the countries that have adopted Islam are like.
Man I really hoped you would laugh at my joke about the goat.
Cheers for now
Mel
From the outside looking in I totally understand your point of view. There is no way for me to to expalin what it is like to have an epiphany or meeting with God or whatever anyone would like to call it and the certainty that comes from experiencing that. What I will say is that the Bible seems to understand the nature of man extremely well(a discerner of the heart and soul as it puts it) and it works when put into practise.
I tend not to put my judgement of good and evil on individuals as I have not walked a mile in their shoes but I am quite within my rights to judge others actions. Trends or societies are easier to judge as it is easier to see the fruit of their beliefs on a wider scale.
I do know a lot of Muslims and many are wonderful people but I do judge their religion harshly as to what it produces and what most of the countries that have adopted Islam are like.
Man I really hoped you would laugh at my joke about the goat.
Cheers for now
Mel
The is one true God and the Bible is the Word of God.
God’s Word is true and let every man be a liar.
And in making that statement, you had nothing to go on besides your own processes of discernment. You had to be the one who picked the Bible (and both parts of it, not just the older one) over the Koran, etc. You used a decision-making process to do that. Every nonbeliever uses the same process to figure out right from wrong.
You not only missed my point, you based your illustration (about evolution) on a false premise. I have never spoken against evolution since there are no grounds for assuming that an evolving universe is incapable with a loving creator.
A universe without intention is similarly without direction. You are incapable of valuing anything based on your belief that there is no value system in the universe.
If reality is directionless it is either chaotic or it is purely circumstantial.
You may choose to value a pet but your choice has no merit beyond itself. You are a solypsist, capable of believing only that reality is an extension of yourself. I choose not to live in your universe.
there are no grounds for assuming that an evolving universe is incapable with a loving creator.
please substitute the word inconsistent with my use of the word incapable. I got my fingers caught between two different approaches to saying the same thing.
Your comments about a "universe without intention" implies that human beings are capable of understanding and discovering that intention, if it indeed exists. Why should I assume that any of the hundreds of thousands of religious traditions in the world has even an inkling of what that intention might be?
On the subject of putting words into another's mouth, why would you assume that I believe there is no value system in the universe? I believe that there is a logical approach to being able to discern right and wrong without the need of being preached to by some human being that others have elevated to a pulpit, to interpret with his human limitations, the intention of some unseen deity.
Every human being who has accepted the teachings of some other fallible human being (even if that human being was claiming to describe a divine being) has made a set of choices regarding which fallible human being to follow, and which ones to reject, in whole or in part. I'm capable of using the same method to discern my own personal value system and moral code.
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.