[atlaw]

Not sure what your post has to do with mine. But as for your proposition that "in the absence of G-d there is nothing objectively morally wrong with genocide or selective breeding or hatred or mass murder or anything else," there is an unfortunate inverse.

"God" has historically been provided with a great many self-serving and arbitrary attributes, and has taken on many forms. He is a handy slate on which to write the conventions of morality. And consequently, "in the [presence] of God there is nothing objectively morally wrong with genocide or selective breeding or hatred or mass murder or anything else," so long as the person committing these morally reprehensible acts proclaims them to be the "will" of his God.

Which leaves us in a peculiar situation. If God is the source of morality, by what measure do we conclude that acts committed in the name of "God" are morally reprehensible?

[Zionist Conspirator]

Not sure what your post has to do with mine. But as for your proposition that "in the absence of G-d there is nothing objectively morally wrong with genocide or selective breeding or hatred or mass murder or anything else," there is an unfortunate inverse.

"God" has historically been provided with a great many self-serving and arbitrary attributes, and has taken on many forms. He is a handy slate on which to write the conventions of morality. And consequently, "in the [presence] of God there is nothing objectively morally wrong with genocide or selective breeding or hatred or mass murder or anything else," so long as the person committing these morally reprehensible acts proclaims them to be the "will" of his God.

Which leaves us in a peculiar situation. If God is the source of morality, by what measure do we conclude that acts committed in the name of "God" are morally reprehensible?

Thank you for raising a valid issue instead of merely dismissing anyone who questions whether a meaningless universe and create and impose an objective morality.

First of all, when you define morality (as I do) as "arbitrary Divine decree," it becomes a little silly to say "if G-d is the source of morality." Of course G-d is the source of His Decrees! How could it be otherwise?

Second, you are assuming that all religion is either inherited ethno-cultural taboos from a prehistoric past and/or the product of human speculation. Is this assumption of yours self-evident? Are all religions equally moonbeams, the products of "holy men" who went off into a mountain somewhere and then came back and said "G-d spoke to me?"

I would also remind you that actually, all the "Biblical" religions admit that Judaism was founded by G-d and was the One True Religion at one time in the past. They all agree on this, but they all insist that it was replaced by something else--and they can never agree on what allegedly "replaced" it! Have you ever thought about this?