Posted on 03/25/2015 12:56:56 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
"Duck Dynasty's" Phil Robertson has come under fire once again, this time for a speech he made about a hypothetical atheist family at an annual prayer breakfast in Florida on Friday.
Robertson described a graphic scenario while sharing his thoughts on those who do not believe in God.
"Two guys break into an atheist's home," Robertson began. "He has a little atheist wife and two little atheist daughters. Two guys break into his home and tie him up in a chair and gag him. And then they take his two daughters in front of him and rape both of them and then shoot 'em and they take his wife and then decapitate her head off in front of him. And they can look at him and say, 'Isn't it great that I don’t have to worry about being judged? Isn't it great that there's nothing wrong with this? There's no right or wrong, now is it dude?'
"Then you take a sharp knife and take his manhood and hold it in front of him and say, 'Wouldn't it be something if this was something wrong with this? But you’re the one who says there is no God, there’s no right, there’s no wrong, so we’re just having fun. We're sick in the head, have a nice day.'
"If it happened to them, they probably would say, 'Something about this just ain't right.'"
Many took to Twitter to voice their disapproval once recordings of Robertson's speech made their way onto the Internet.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Agreed, esp. the kid part.
Nor do I think that atheists don't believe in right and wrong.
Disagree. They see morality as a social construct, not as absolutes (with the exception that there are no absolutes). So what might be right and wrong for one is not right and wrong for all. And I believe this is the point that Phil Robertson was trying to get across with his crude analogy. Either there is an absolute right and wrong, given by someone greater than man, or there is none.
Absolutely - “If there is no God then everything is permitted” - and I would have to guess that includes Robertson’s admittedly graphic description of Dostoevsky’s aphorism.
Sorry secularists, that’s your own petard you’re hanging from.
Well since that IS exactly what atheist collectivists HAVE done to people by the millions, and for those exact same reasons, I can see why the Leftists might be screaming loud enough to protect tender liberal ears from hearing Robertson’s story.
Better yet, both Protestants and Catholics HAVE accepted Christ as their saviors and yet they still both believe the others - hundreds of millions each - are going to hell.
And the kicker is that neither believes these hypocrisies keep people away from Christ, while liberals TELL THEM it does.
I saw a bumper sticker once that said "Jesus is coming and boy is He pissed."
Sounds like a pretty twisted scenario to me. Also completely realistic. Just because atheists deny an “objective” (God-imposed, or man-created, depending on your point of view) morality doesn’t mean they don’t subscribe to some concept of “good and bad”.
Little wonder many atheists are rather militant and strident about it, though, when you see the kind of commentary you get on a thread like this. We’re all “fascists” are we? As far as I know I’ve never subscribed to a political or world view that could be described as “fascist”. Maybe the word means something different in your imagination.
Everybody who’s criticizing him: stfu.
“Please provide proof to your statement. Otherwise, piss off troll.”
Qaml has been around here just as long as you (and almost as long as me). Where do you get off calling him or her a troll?
Also, any number of studies have shown that atheists are underrepresented among the ranks of those who are incarcerated. Interpret that how you will, but it IS the case that people who self report as atheists are underrepresented in crime statistics.
Christians only in the sense that they are not Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. Just a convenient label. Truly Born-Again Christians are much less likely to be that kind of monster.
I say that's just a cheap cop-out. The fact is, just about any action can be construed as causing some harm to somebody. If the neutered man in the example were to fight back, he would be denying the criminals the pleasure of robbing him and murdering his family. What gives him that right? The fact that losing his family might hurt? So why is his freedom from pain more important than the attackers' gratification?
So you see, there HAS to be some form of moral authorship that exceeds mere humanity, or there's no morality at all.
Mr. Robertson didn't take quite as many words (or syllables), but he said the same thing.
Could someone page Danny Glover on the RED courtesy phone in the lobby.
F'king communists.
Sorry, got carried away...
5.56mm
“Disagree. They see morality as a social construct, not as absolutes (with the exception that there are no absolutes). So what might be right and wrong for one is not right and wrong for all. And I believe this is the point that Phil Robertson was trying to get across with his crude analogy. Either there is an absolute right and wrong, given by someone greater than man, or there is none.”
Correct, and I would agree with this - there is no absolute right or wrong. Of course, I would point out that there are a number of faiths on this earth which believe in different Gods and have different ideas on what God says is Right or Wrong. Which one, if any, is right? I imagine you believe your understanding of right and wrong, as described in the Bible, is the correct one. All those other people believe so just as strongly.
Me? I don’t know. I don’t believe in Objectivism - I just don’t think there is any objective basis for morality. At the same time I can see the problems that presents. I can also see that a belief in God and a desire for eternal life (or to avoid hell) can be a powerful force for getting people to obey moral codes, and I don’t know what can substitute for that. OTOH, such beliefs don’t seem to stop a lot of people from just doing what they want, anyway.
I believe people should be given the benefit of the doubt...
A sick fantasy story about chopping little girls heads off and raping a wife in front of her husband.
Not fantasy stores. Google, "chopping girls heads off," and "raping wives in front of husbands." The results are not good, right?
Considering Christians are overwhelmingly more likely to be criminals, the sick murderers in this story are most likely Christians
How to respond to a bigot?
May the Lord grant to you peace of heart and mind.
Amen.
5.56mm
I don’t speak gibberish.
You want to say you side with liberals and deny Christ, just say it.
Does not anyone think that there are not Atheists who are conservative, have moral values, and who don’t hate Christians? These generalizations being thrown out are lazy thinking.
It depends on what Christian Ethics the Atheists are raised with, and many atheist had the Bible and Christian Ethics embedded into their childhood which make them “feel” correctly-—about “Right and Wrong” although without God (Universal Truth) there is no Moral Law-—Nietzsche said as much.
People, like Marquis de Sade and Godwin and Shelley and Byron had no problem with incest and sodomy and any dehumanizing, degrading use of others or themselves and were vile human beings, who didn’t believe in marriage or the Natural Family. They were godless.
You are also stating the genius Dostoevsky is wrong. LOL. Sorry-—you are incapable of having a mind close to his. He stated “Without God, everything is permissible.”
See-—without God-—you make yourself into God and decide, like Jeffrey Dahmer, what is good and evil.
All the most evil people in the world were people who threw out God/Christianity and made themselves the measure of all things, like Jeffrey Dahmer, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pot, Rothschild, etc. etc.
“Does not anyone think that there are not Atheists who are conservative, have moral values, and who don’t hate Christians? These generalizations being thrown out are lazy thinking.”
Yes, there are plenty of us. None of that is good enough unless we profess faith in the one and only true God and religion.
I’ll try not to judge all Christians based on the invective they’re spewing in this thread.
I attended the Church of Christ. Yeah, this was unfortunate and not very Christian of him.
Phil doesn’t understand the difference between natural and positive law, but if he did these things he’d be looking at life or lethal injection, and he knows it.
Well said, savagesusie.
If God ordered you to kill me, would you and would that be a moral act?
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.