[Steve_Seattle]

Thank you. So what Robertson was doing was pointing out that atheism - quite literally - denies moral absolutes. It is actually a fairly obvious - if not sophisticated - argument, an argument that Timpf is nonetheless too timid to use, so she must mock it for fear of offending secularists. But Robertson is pointing to an undeniable fact.

This is actually a case of Robertson schooling Timpf in Philosophy 101. And she thinks SHE is the sophisticated one?

[SeekAndFind]

If you think about it, Phil has a point ( although it was crudely made ).

Atheists, if they believe that we are all ultimately a by product of mindless chance and evolution from the primordial slime, and are the result of accidental collision of atoms with no Ultimate Creator giving us moral laws to follow, have to ask themselves — is there really and objectively RIGHT or WRONG? GOOD or EVIL?

Or is it simply a societal construct ( and an individual preference )?

In an atheistic worldview, Who decides whether a murderer is REALLY and OBJECTIVELY evil?

An accidental collision of atoms called NAZI’s struck down an an accidental collision of atoms called JEWS.... what of it then? It is simply all atoms in the end...