Atheists are already the most despised minority in America and the least likely to be voted for in any election, but why even accord atheists any rights if they are so untrustworthy and so un-American? This is an especially serious concern in an America where, based on mere suspicion and without proof of any crime, it is possible for a person to be arrested, imprisoned, and denied counsel, trial, or even a realistic prospect of future freedom.
John Martignoni of the Bible Christian Society (a "Catholic Apologetics organization") writes:
Well, I maintain, and I think most of you will agree with me, that we have value simply because we are alive...that human life has inherent value. In other words, simply because it is human life, it has value. But, what is my basis for saying that? It is this: we have value as human beings because God gives us value...He gives us value by His love for us.
John Martignoni denies that we have value because we are productive, because we are useful, because of our IQ, or because of anything else. Why, though, is this alleged god's love a more sufficient basis for "value" than any of those other things — or even simply because we choose to value our lives? Martignoni doesn't say. It's his subjective opinion, which makes his next bit very ironic:
This is why people who do not believe in God cannot offer any objective reason for saying that they themselves have value as human beings. Without God, everything becomes subjective...merely one person’s opinion versus another person’s opinion...and the strongest person’s opinon prevails. Without God, might, in essence, makes right. I’ve talked to atheists before and I’ve asked them if what Hitler did to the Jews was wrong. And they answered that of course it was! Then I asked them, why? Why was it wrong for Hitler to kill six million Jews? Essentially, all they could answer me with was, “Well, it just was.”
Why do we have value because Martignoni's god loves us? Well, just because. I'll bet this is very persuasive for people who already believe in Martignoni's god, but they hardly need persuading, do they? It's worth noting here that John Martignoni isn't actually offering any reasons to believe that any gods exist. Even if we accept his argument at face value, the negative consequence of atheism doesn't constitute a valid reason to think that any gods — much less his god — really do exist. At best it's an argument to believe in some sort of god regardless of whether it's true or not. In other words, it's an argument that is completely indifferent to the value of truth.
Hitler was wrong if, and only if, God exists. If God does not exist, then might makes right and Hitler was the mightiest in Germany at the time, so he had every right to do what he did. This causes problems for any self-proclaimed atheists (and those who side with them) who wish to remove God from everything.
Why was Hitler wrong if and only if God exits? Well, just because.
They only have rights, under our system of law, because our system of law is built around the belief that the Creator has endowed them with these rights. And when were they endowed with these rights? At the moment of their creation. Which is when? When they were born? Don’t think so. When they first came into existence...when mommy’s egg cell met daddy’s sperm cell. I’ll get into that more in the next newsletter. But, suffice it to say, that atheists have a problem when it comes to unalienable rights because of the fact that they don’t believe in the God Who has supposedly given them their unalienable rights. Without a God Who endows us with rights, any attempt to say we inherently have rights as human beings is merely based on one’s subjective opinion.
So, I advocate that those who wish to take God out of our school’s, out of our legal system, out of the public square, should be given their wish. After all, if choice is one of their gods, and it is, then let’s give them their choice. When it comes to atheists, every one needs to act as if God doesn’t exist. As a result, they should have no rights under our system of law, after all, there is no Creator to endow them with those rights. So, I say we should throw them all in jail (without a trial, of course); or perhaps make them work for the public good at minimum wage for their entire lives; or maybe make them work as pooper scoopers in the public parks where folks walk their dogs; or some such thing.
And, furthermore, I say they should have no access to legal counsel nor to our court system nor to any other means of legal redress. After all, the legal system is founded on the belief in a Creator Who endows us with our unalienable rights. They don’t believe in that Creator, so why should they be upset to not have access to a legal system founded on such a belief?
So atheists only have rights because Martignoni's god exists; therefore atheists should be denied any and all rights. So if atheists stop having rights, doesn't that mean Martignoni's god doesn't exist anymore? Indeed, if John Martignoni really believed all he said about humans having value and rights because of his god, then any recommendation to deny others rights because of some irrelevant quality like disbelieving in his god suggests that he doesn’t believe as much as he protests. More likely, though, it helps show that however much believers might tout their principles in theory, they won't honor them in practice if it suits their political and ideological purposes.
One last thing, if you ever want to drive home the point of all of this with someone who claims to be an atheist, after asking them if Hitler was right and going through all of what we talked about above regarding the Declaration, ask them to give you a reason for why it would be wrong for you to kill them. Just look them straight in the eye and say, “Can you give me an objective moral reason for why it would be wrong for me to shoot you where you stand?” You might startle them. But, no matter what they say, simply reply, “Well, that’s just your opinion. I don’t believe that. Give me an objective moral reason, not simply your opinion.”
If someone who has had the misfortune of reading and believing Martignoni ever tries to debate you, just respond to any claims about their god needing to exist in order for values and rights to exist by saying "Well, that's just your opinion. I don't believe that. Give me an objective, empirical reason, not simply your opinion." That's not a reasoned counter-argument, but you aren't dealing with a reasoned argument in the first place. Martignoni's advice is essentially to abandon any pretense at serious and original thought in favor of mindlessly repeating a religious mantra over and over, no matter what one hears in response.
Come to think of it, doesn't that describe the advice that is commonly offered by religious apologists? Perhaps we should be thankful to John Martignoni for making explicit what is usually only implicit.
“This is why people who do not believe in God cannot offer any objective reason for saying that they themselves have value as human beings.”
Can he himself offer any objective reason as to why human beings have value?
Perhaps he will respond that it is because god loves us, as he wrote in the article.
But then why does the Judeo-Christian god loving us give us objective moral value? Just because?
Also, the idea that atheists have no objective reason to believe in rights doesn’t lead to the conclusion that atheists should therefore have no rights.
Following his line of argument, since no-one can give an objective answer to whether rights should exist (for example), no one should have any rights.
That atheists have no objective reason to believe in rights doesn’t follow from many theists believing that rights come from their deity. Non sequitur fallacy. That is like saying that because I believe sentient beings have intrinsic moral value, therefore no one else with a different perception of the world can believe sentient beings have intrinsic moral value.
This is what scares me about theists. Essentially they are saying that they have no morals except for what they are told, i.e. from their god. Having morals is about making decisions. If you are relying on others to make your decsions then you have no morals. This is why we get marters and acts of terrorism and oppression in the name of imaginary beings. And we atheist are the ones without morals!
This is some of the scariest stuff I’ve ever read, not just what he is saying, but that something like this can really happen if Christians gain even more power. And his entire warped argument is based on his fanatical belief that HIS is the one true god and that this god exists absolutely. If anything he is the one creating a Hitler-like atmosphere for those different than him. His is the master race.
I was wondering what the world be like in 500 or 1000 years. As science advances and time goes by, how will religious zealots still be able to defend their beliefs. Won’t there come a day when people say, okay, this has gone on long enough. Even if this does happen, I fear things could get worse before they get better. I have a 3 year old boy and I’m raising him to be a freethinker (he is Jewish by birth).
> But, suffice it to say, that atheists have a problem when it comes to unalienable rights because of the fact that they don’t believe in the God Who has supposedly given them their unalienable rights.
Actually, I do have a problem with unalienable rights, personally. I don’t believe they exist.
>Without a God Who endows us with rights, any attempt to say we inherently have rights as human beings is merely based on one’s subjective opinion.
Well, no, it’s group consensus. All societies enforce their own rules that provide their citizens with X-rights. In our case, the Constitution gives me whatever rights I have. The “Creator” who grants us “unalienable rights” is actually from the Bill of Rights–which is NOT the document that my rights as a U.S. citizen derive from. It was a document justiying the revolution.
If Martignoni believes his rights come from god–then what good is the Constitution–and what need is there for one? Interestingly, the Constitution–that _actual_ basis of our rights in this nation–never mentions a creator or a god.
Correction to my post above: I indicated the “Bill of Rights” where I meant to indicate the Declaration of Independence. D’oh!
Somewhere, I ran across a letter written by Thomas Jefferson where he stated that one of the reasons we have the 2nd amendment is so that we can use it to preserve the first one.
This is really creepy. I hope for the sake of the world that this person’s views are in the extreme minority.
Why do atheists think that what Hitler did to the Jews was wrong? Because of a human emotion called empathy. Because it shocks us that humans could do that sort of thing to other humans. Because we would be terrified to be in the place of those innocent people who were tortured and put to death. We weren’t given this emotion by any gods; rather, it developed gradually in the human race as we evolved, and emerges in most of us as we grow up. Since it appears that Martignoni and his ilk lack this emotion, would it be appropriate to say that they are not human, and don’t deserve the rights we accord to the rest of society? No. Just because people are different doesn’t mean that there’s something wrong with treating them all as equals. Why? Not because of some absolute “rights” but because this principle means so much to us as a society, and keeps us functioning together. Without our morality, humans wouldn’t have come so far.
Wow, if this moron believes Hitler was only wrong because he believes in God, then he’s just a small step away from killing us all!
Eric: Not only that–but if he ever gets it into his head that god approves of genocide–like if he reads his OT one day–he may actually start to think Hitler acted morally correctly.
In fact, throughout the OT, there are examples of the Jews being slaughtered at the hands of their enemies when they strayed from god’s path. And for Xians, Jews are definitely off the path since they reject/ed Jesus…so Hitler may have been god’s loving hand trying to guide the Jews to righteousness…?
… all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator …
The “their” refers to “men”. So, it’s my Creator that endowed my rights, not John Martignoni’s Creator.
“Can you give me an objective moral reason for why it would be wrong for me to shoot you where you stand?”
I would consider that a threat and I would search his unconscious body for a weapon.
I suppose a question to ask is whether this fellow has actually talked to any atheists? The statements he makes are largely assumptions since all atheists lack is a belief in a deity, but they are free to believe in aliens, ghosts, Bigfoot, healing crystals, etc. or be a part of a religion that doesn’t involve a deity such as some sects of Budddhism or Raeliens.
>“Can you give me an objective moral reason for why it would be wrong for me to shoot you where you stand?”
Another funny thing here is that this query assumes that unless motives are objective, they’re irrelevant or not valid. I think the way it’s normally stated is something like this: If morality is subjectively determined by each person, then one is as good as the next, and nobody has any more right to impose it on one person as another.
The problem with this line of reasoning is that people aren’t solitary creatures. Certainly if we weren’t social, this line of reasoning would carry more weight; but as we’re social creatures, society takes on a greater role than the individual, and we end up sacrificing individual rights and freedoms for the betterment of the society (to greater or lesser degrees, depending on the social model we use).
Society may not have a “right” to impose rules–but inarguably, it has the capacity. Which rules should/can be imposed is definitely open for discussion–but it’s a question that ultimately people should determine. And the Constitution makes this clear in our own society, when it begins with, “We the People…”
Not all societies accept that the people should govern themselves–and that’s why it’s an open philosophical question–which social structure is “best”? But the reality is that without the consent of the governed, it’s very difficult to govern. But people will still attempt that–and revolutions will continue for that very reason.
Anyway–my point is that subjective regulations are executable, and who has more “right” to determine how people should behave than the _people_ themselves?
I don’t go around looking at wild wolf societies and questioning what gives them the right to have an alpha male/female heiarchy. That would be daft. Their dogs, they live by their dog rules in their dog societies. Why should they have any more rights/freedoms to run their own social model than humans?
This is really really creepy. Atheists must be totally warped or something. Just reading a few of your comments I feel sorry for you. You think Christians can overrule your freedom of choice. God did not give us free well so we could not use it. Besides Christians are oppressing you, you have freedom of speech which you are demostrating now. Also, you have freedom to do as you please.
Hmmm… I was wondering what the world be like in 500 or 1000 years. As science advances and time goes by, how will religious zealots still be able to defend their beliefs.
Unless you’ve been to the future, you needn’t make assumption. O wait…Atheist do that all the time. Sorry please continue.
Humans do have value because God created us. But its a lot deeper than that. God’s love over flows into creation. Creation in the sense of creating. God says that when we have a overflow there is a manifestation. I know you don’t understand. A person with violent thought will eventually overflow into committing violent acts. A person of negative thoughts can overflow to sucide or other depressive natures. The manifestation(s) do not have to be others things. But we are the manifestation of God’s love.
Tracieh, as alway you are talking about things you don’t understand. You need to reread the Bible. Sorry, you need to find a teacher because you don’t understand old testament.
>God did not give us free well so we could not use it.
I thought god was omniscent? If so, then I do not have free will.
>Humans do have value because God created us.
God created viruses and cockroaches, too.
>Tracieh, as alway you are talking about things you don’t understand. You need to reread the Bible. Sorry, you need to find a teacher because you don’t understand old testament.
Here is what I said: “In fact, throughout the OT, there are examples of the Jews being slaughtered at the hands of their enemies when they strayed from god’s path.”
The Old Testament prophecies are loaded with “fulfilled” prophecies of Israel being violently delivered into the hands of their enemies when god was unhappy with them. It’s also loaded with tales of god doing the dirty work himself–and killing loads of men, women, _and children_ when he decided they’re weren’t acting correctly. Do you need me to put some verses down–do you really not recall any of this?
>God did not give us free well so we could not use it.
If god is omniscent, free will is not possible.
>Humans do have value because God created us.
God supposedly created cockroaches and bacteria, too.
>Tracieh, as alway you are talking about things you don’t understand. You need to reread the Bible. Sorry, you need to find a teacher because you don’t understand old testament.
The Old Testament is full of stories that relay claims that the Israelites were killed/enslaved by their enemies because god was displeased with them for this or that reason. Also, there are many, many stories that claim Yahweh killed them himself on occasion–including all their children–because he was displeased with them. If you aren’t familiar with any of these myriad tales, then you’re simply ignorant of the content of your own Bible. Egyptian enslavement? Deadly world-wide flood? Anything ringing a bell so far? There are plenty more that aren’t nearly as famous, but they’re in there.
If Martignoni believes his rights come from god–then what good is the Constitution–and what need is there for one? Interestingly, the Constitution–that _actual_ basis of our rights in this nation–never mentions a creator or a god.
Duh again. Everyone doesn’t belive in God. Inorder to protect His people’s right living with nonbelievers, He had the constitution created. Nonbelievers follow it because they are men and women also. It’s independent of their false belief(s) or the lack of one. You will obey Him even if you don’t want. God has a sense of humor. He’s laughing at you for thinking you can avoid Him.
If God is omniscent, free will is not possible… Understand this because you are failing to comprehend.
At one time the United States was the most powerful nation on the planet, other nations still did as they pleased. God could have create a robot. However Tracieh, you move and think independent of Him. Power is not control. God is all powerful, but He gave you the right of choice. You can choose Him or not. Atheist choose Him not.
Isn’t it funny that God would grant the right to free exercize of religion when that violates His first two Commandments.
The Old Testament prophecies are loaded with “fulfilled” prophecies of Israel being violently delivered into the hands of their enemies when god was unhappy with them. It’s also loaded with tales of god doing the dirty work himself–and killing loads of men, women, _and children_ when he decided they’re weren’t acting correctly. Do you need me to put some verses down–do you really not recall any of this?
Excellent remark. But it has no wisdom. Its full of knowledge. God allowed Israel ememies to conquer them. He delivered them into the hand of their enemies. If you choose not to follow Him, He’ll let you “follow” another that is why Israel was “slaughtered” at the hands of their enemies. If you have children and they reject your authority as a parent, you can’t force them to listen. They will perish at the hands of their enemies for not listening to your “sound” advice. God killing loads of men, women, and children. You need to reread as I said before. You don’t understand. Verses are knowledge… Facts are knowledge. They are not understanding…ie wisdom. God people perish for a lack of wisdom, not knowledge. Please gain some when you talk about the Bible. It is spiritually discerned.
Isn’t it funny that God would grant the right to free exercize of religion when that violates His first two Commandments.
Comment by nal.
You have a right to choose life or death. God is life. But you can choose death. God does not violate any of His laws. He tells we should love Him and have life. Or you can reject Him and have death… apart from God is only death.
Please people read the Bible correctly.
Alex, please stop with the preachiness and personal remarks. You really do seem to have something against atheists.
By preachyness I mean throwing about random claims that rely on the truth of yor particular holy book for backing.
John Martignoni seems to be saying that everyone one else has rights because God decided they do. But then, where does God’s right to decide who else has rights come from? Doesn’t that mean His right must have come from another higher power, which in turn must have gotten the right to give God this right from another higher power, and so on and so forth for infinity? Morality comes from empathy, the ability to imagine ourselves in someone else’s circumstances. Has John Martignoni ever imagined what it would be like to be in a Nazi death camp? Unless, of course, he thinks God has the right to decide these things for us because of His power, the “might makes right” idea.
Alex, please stop with the preachiness and personal remarks. You really do seem to have something against atheists.
Comment by Child of Thorns
Ok. Then you should tell all atheists to stop commenting on God, the Christian God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Let me see you do that first. I will defend the gospel.
In other words, what Hitler did was wrong because almost nobody would want that done to them.
Child of Thorns, here an analogy. First, remove the boulder off your back before you try to assist me with the pebble in my hand.
I guess “do unto others” isn’t a principle you follow, huh? There is absolutely no reason for you to cease “preachiness and personal remarks” only if atheists cease being critical of Christianity — especially given that this is an agnosticism / atheism site (in case you hadn’t noticed). If you lack the integrity or will power to cease the preachiness, I’ll have to act on your behalf by deleting your comments.
Here’s an analogy: you’re a guest in our house and should conduct yourself accordingly. If you can’t, you’ll have to leave.
“Duh again. Everyone doesn’t belive in God. Inorder to protect His people’s right living with nonbelievers, He had the constitution created.”
Interesting, Alex. I wonder if God was also responsible for the three fifths compromise declaring black slaves only worth three fifths of a white person for representative purposes. If that’s the case, does that mean that God thinks black people have less value than white people?
“This is really really creepy. Atheists must be totally warped or something. Just reading a few of your comments I feel sorry for you. You think Christians can overrule your freedom of choice. God did not give us free well so we could not use it. Besides Christians are oppressing you, you have freedom of speech which you are demostrating now. Also, you have freedom to do as you please.”
The whole reason for this posting is because there are Christians who think that atheists should NOT have that freedom of choice and that Christians should be allowed to do horrible things to atheists as a result.
Alex:
He tells we should love Him and have life. Or you can reject Him and have death.
No brainer: I do no accept Him, even if that means death. I will not be bribed, with the promise of everlasting life, to give up my ability for rational thought.
“Ok. Then you should tell all atheists to stop commenting on God, the Christian God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Let me see you do that first. I will defend the gospel. ”
You know people on here do not accept the bible as truth. Using scripture and beliefs based on it in an argument against people here is futile. Therefore you are either ignorant of this, and honestly thought that atheists would realise god existed because it says so in a book they don’t accept as literal truth, or you simply came here to harass people.
If I went on to a christian discussion board and tried to convince them that god didn’t exist because the bible wasn’t true (not that the conclusion in that follows but…) then it would be classed as either ignorance or harassment as they accepted the truth of the bible and my argument would not convince them at all.
Martin Luther wrote a book. The title was: the Jews and their lies. In it, he outlined what should be done about the Jews, and why. I read that a copy of his book was on display under glass at Nazi headquarters.
Therefore you are either ignorant of this, and honestly thought that atheists would realise god existed because it says so in a book they don’t accept as literal truth, or you simply came here to harass people.
The reason why I came here is because an atheist came on a Christian website commenting on his belief. So I came here to in response. I don’t hate or dislike you. I dislike ignorance about the Bible, and people commenting on it. God has given me a tongue of the learned. How do you know that someone may not be converted. God is able to the impossible. You have a right to says what you will and so does God.
He goes on and on about wanting objective reasons, that do not include a god, for morality from atheists but since he only believes in a morality handed down by his god, who he believes in only through faith, doesn’t that make it his subjective belief or opinion?
Alex said:
True enough, so I wonder why he only sends folks like you instead of doing it himself.
RE: post 13
When I arise in the morning I take some peanuts to the squirrels and they have gotten to trust me enough to take them from my hand. My dog greets me with eye contact and a wagging tail. The Robin sits on a branch and sings. I feel a close sense of kinship and close connection to the world and all the other lifeforms that inhabit this world. I don’t think a person who believes that he or she is a separate creation can have this feeling of connection and kinship. Alex. Don’t feel sorry for me! I wouldn’t have it any other way.
“The reason why I came here is because an atheist came on a Christian website commenting on his belief. So I came here to in response. I don’t hate or dislike you. I dislike ignorance about the Bible, and people commenting on it. God has given me a tongue of the learned. How do you know that someone may not be converted. God is able to the impossible. You have a right to says what you will and so does God. ”
An eye for an eye eh? So what one atheist does means that other atheists can take the blame for? Well, someone who’s religion claims that a man should have died because of other people’s faults, I suppose it isn’t really all that surprising.
Also, you don’t seem to understand what I was saying. You are making all these claims about the natural world, morality etc. that rely on the truth of your holy book to have any support whatsoever. You beleive the bible is inerrant, people here do not. No one here will be currantly convinved by your arguments.
Hence if you thought about this before commenting here, you would not have used scripture to convince people of the truth of your religion, you would have tried to convince people in other ways.
And from waht I can see, most of your attacks on peoples “ignorance” of the bible is mostly other people’s interpretations of the bible that do not match yours.
I dislike ignorance about the Bible, and people commenting on it.
It’s my hopes that you have turned this comment upon yourself. The Bible is a book… as with any book, it is open to interpretation and discussion. Are you assuming here that YOU are the only one who has the correct perception and interpretation of its words? Arrogant, but from what I’ve seen here I should expect nothing less.
God has given me a tongue of the learned.
I would hope so, because if you speak as well as you type, then God’s “tongue of the learned” gift is something a lot of us can do without.
God is able to the impossible. You have a right to say[sic] what you will and so does God.
Okay. So why exactly are you here?
I guess “do unto others” isn’t a principle you follow, huh? There is absolutely no reason for you to cease “preachiness and personal remarks” only if atheists cease being critical of Christianity — especially given that this is an agnosticism / atheism site (in case you hadn’t noticed). If you lack the integrity or will power to cease the preachiness, I’ll have to act on your behalf by deleting your comments.
Here’s an analogy: you’re a guest in our house and should conduct yourself accordingly. If you can’t, you’ll have to leave.
Comment by Austin Cline — November 5, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
This is directly meant for Austin Cline. You are correct this is a agnoisticism/ atheism site. You can delete my comments if you want. Youve comment on my preachiness and personal remarks. You even talked about intergity. Now I read many personal and preachy remark made by atheist. You are talking about Someone you didn’t expect to respond. God can use anyone He wishs to bring forth His word or respond to you that is His right. You should not talk about someone else if you don’t want them to rebuke you. God is very real. Its ironic that you have been comment on Christianity and thought no one would come. Scripture: Be not decieved God is not mocked. Give unto God what is His. You have made peronal remarks, but you are saying you are allowed.
Integrity: the quality or state of being complete or undivided.
Some one said do unto to other as you would have them do unto you. So if you make personal remark shouldn’t you be expected to recieve them also.
Here? If not, it’s not relevant.
Your egotistical assumption that you’re acting as a mouthpiece for your god is also irrelevant. All that’s relevant is your behavior, for which you are personal responsible and for which you will have to personally accept the consequences.
Your god is free to contact me, if it exists. For the time being, I’m talking to you, not to any gods, and you have no authority to rebuke me for anything. You certainly have no right to behave badly and like an ill-mannered guest — which is precisely what you have been doing.
That’s a falsehood. I didn’t think that no Christians would stop by; I do, however, expect them to behave with some modicum of decency.
When I make personal remarks about you, go ahead and respond in kind — though of course that would mean that you don’t believe in that Golden Rule.
Jeremy, Why He only sends people like me instead of doing it Himself?
In Old Testament, God came and people like you still did not believe. God spoke to the people out of a wall of fire. But the people did not see Him. God is a Spirit that cannot be seen with human eyes. So God became Flesh (Jesus). Yet, you still do not believe. People continue to use the same excuse. Why doesn’t He come? He doesn’t have too every time. But God is good and just. He sent His Spirit into the world to bring forth His law.
As it says in Isaiah 6:8-9, “Who shall I send, and who will go for Us?
Then I said, “Here am I! Send me.”
“Go and tell this people: ‘keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’”
Austin Cline, When I make personal remarks about you, go ahead and respond in kind — though of course that would mean that you don’t believe in that Golden Rule.
So you say I have been addressing you in a negative behavior. I address the comments and they came. Yes, I told several member that they do not understand what they are commenting on in the Bible. Its true that not a lie. When I said atheist make assumptions on a lot of things? I should have stated when it comes to Christianity. Since I only comment on Biblical teaching, it should have been perceived. God’s word says to rebuke false teaching. God tells His people to go.
But please show me examples:
You certainly have no right to behave badly and like an ill-mannered guest — which is precisely what you have been doing. Such as: This is really really creepy. Atheists must be totally warped or something. Just reading a few of your comments I feel sorry for you. That was based on the comment. This is what scares me about theists. Essentially they are saying that they have no morals except for what they are told, i.e. from their god. This is some of the scariest stuff I’ve ever read, not just what he is saying, but that something like this can really happen if Christians gain even more power.
No, I say you have been behaving inappropriately. You will change, or you will stop posting here — this isn’t a matter of debate. Any further posts like the last one which misrepresent the issue and/or try to justify said behavior will be treated as an announcement that you have no intention of changing and have, in fact, been behaving this way in a fully deliberate, conscious manner; as a consequence, further posts of yours will be deleted without warning or comment. If you have questions you can email me privately, but there won’t be any further discussion of the matter here.
Austin
Let him be. I’m enjoying this.
Funny how christians project like that all the time. It’s “WITH God” that might makes right, by their own arguments – god is all powerful and made everything, so you have to do what he says or else.
Are they just stupid, or blind? Or is it willful? None of those options is really palatable…
Austin, maybe you should post something like a “Wall of Alex” of his scintillating remarks. I always thought your page could use more humor.
No, I say you have been behaving inappropriately. You will change, or you will stop posting here — this isn’t a matter of debate. Any further posts like the last one which misrepresent the issue and/or try to justify said behavior will be treated as an announcement that you have no intention of changing and have, in fact, been behaving this way in a fully deliberate, conscious manner; as a consequence, further posts of yours will be deleted without warning or comment. If you have questions you can email me privately, but there won’t be any further discussion of the matter here.
Austin, you seem upset. Based on your last remark you just don’t like what I have to say period. Please do as you feel. If you feel I have done something wrong or not in a debatable post, please erase my comments.
Arguments and Debates
There are naturally a lot of debates surrounding atheism, agnosticism, and religion. I don’t hesitate to express my views on the various controversies and offer what I consider to be solid arguments for those positions. However, no one should imagine that I somehow represent all atheists. The only thing all atheists have in common is that they lack belief in the existence of gods; as a consequence, atheists can disagree on any political, social, religious, or philosophical topic. The opinions I express here may be relatively common among atheists, but if you try you can probably find an atheist who disagrees with me — and there are certainly plenty of theists who disagree with me as well. Email, however, is not my preferred format for debates or arguments. If you wish express disagreement or debate some point, you’ll be more likely to get a response if you post in the forum — that’s why it’s there.
Is this a true statement Austin?
The operative word there is “seem” — don’t try to read my word or pretend to know what I’m feeling, because you aren’t any good at it.
Based on your skills at interpreting my words, I don’t think anyone should place any confidence in your interpretation of the Bible.
It’s not an on-topic question for the article you are commenting on. Such questions should be posted to the forum; they will be deleted from here in the future.
You can talk about the old testament, the new testament and god all you want. It has already been pointed out to you that the bible is no more a reliable source for reality than the Iliad, Gilgamesh or Beowulf. You have still yet to give any reason why we should think that your god exists, much less why anyone should think you speak for it.
The Alex-type xtians crack me up. They think that atheists just haven’t heard the right words that will convince us how wonderful and perfect their god is. The god of the bible is laughable as any sort of moral compass, didn’t he wipe out populations of people because of a whim?
I think Hitchens says it well when he asks –“if mankind has been on this planet for say 100,000 yrs., why did it take god 98,000 to show up?” And to that I would also ask “Why did this God vanish after 2000 yrs – Poof…He is no longer there for his chosen people either. Another case in point – they believe this world is 6000 years old based on one man’s opinion, when 100’s if not 1000’s men of science have not been able to validate the truth of that mans ‘opinion’. They make even greater claims that the only book to read is a bible. Leave us to shut the library’s down and relocate the books before they burn them like they have done in the past. And each of the so called faithful apparently has a direct pipeline to the almighty, they all claim to know and be able to decipher their holy books words, the absolute word of god – such arrogance.
Another personal thought: Why does any religion need apologetics? I am against all the religions whatever they are personally, but even Islam doesn’t have as many differences. There are so many denominations and divisions of the Christian faith. One would think that there would be ONE clearly defined deity or direction for all of them – which would carry the exact SAME message. There is NONE All the apologetics are out there making absolute fools of themselves at best.
It scares me that someone like Alex can vote. People in that frame of mind! – I await the Inquisition. The self proclaimed crusaders are all lining up – They want everyone to live back in the dark ages. Their beliefs have kidnapped their minds and sense of reason – There is almost a death threat to anyone who does not validate their sense of purpose or religiosity. And they all need the cover of some deity that will protect them; they do not want any responsibility placed on themselves for their beliefs – rather that of their supreme deity.
Of course, tolerance and justice is just an ideal – and that seems to be slipping into the dungeons of the believers.
Religious people are often less moral because they have one set of morals for those within their cult and another set for those outside. They also substitute moralizing for morality.
A suggestion… allow Alex to post… just remove his bible quotes… since, according to him, we can’t understand or properly interpret anyway… let him stand on his own words & thoughts… one could teach a parrot to comment as he does… though I’m sure he seeks & gets many kudos & backslaps from his peers for his preaching to the lost… I wish all arguments could be made so simply…
… if you don’t agree… “you just don’t understand”… “you lack wisdom”… “you are not properly taught”… “you need to reread the bible”… blah blah blah…
Alex, why don’t you create your own site. Your posts here never have the slightest relevence to the topic at hand, and in fact regardless of the topic, you always saying the same thing.
I would suggest going to John’s website http://www.biblechristiansociety.com and read the ongoing debate between him and Dr. Novella (an atheist) on this very article. The article is not an argument for the existence of God. It’s about the value of human life and morality (objective vs Subjective)
Opps, forgot to mention that the debate is founf in the newsletter section of his website #67 and #68, He does very well in responding to the atheist Dr. Novella.
psalm123,
Thanks for pointing out the site. I will check out the writings of Dr. Novella. That guy makes a lot of sense.
John’s message is an old message. The point is not to be scared of his shotgun. He is from Alabama as is his audience so take that with a grain of salt. This message has been shared by every society from the beginning of time…and that is: All human beings need to raise their morals to a higher standard set by the people. Most people believe in God, but even for those that do not believe in God we all have to define value for life. The moment we open the door to questioning someone’s value we then open the door to what happened in Germany and what is happening now with abortion. If we can all accept our rights as stated in Declaration of Independence the less time we will spend arguing over personal opinion…it really is that simple.
Alright. First, this ‘Alex’ character is not much more and not much less than just that; a character. He’s probably just a kid who got ’saved’, had his god/human/love Thing and now wants the whole world to know about it. Austin, if you give him enough rope, he will probably hang himself with it. He needs to learn first to type, and second, how to put together a well reasoned argument. I tried religion, and nothin’ really happened. I did not have some awesome ‘God experience’ and religion does not do for me what I thought it should. That said, there is proof that this world is only about six to eight thousand years old. There was an eruption in what was it, 1905-07? Anyway, they did carbon dating on it and although the rock in question were known to be about two to three years old, carbon dating returned a date of about three to six BILLION years old. And here I got the impression that carbon dating was the atheist’s Gold Standard of Measurement. Huh. Weird. Anyway, if that is not enough to convince you, take a good close look at the bombardier beetle. This beetle has an organic turret on its butt! It mixes two gases and ’shoots’ at its enemies! If in evolution this were to happen the beetle would have been eaten before it knew to ‘evolve’ a defense mechanism. But for the sake of the argument, lets say that this beetle ‘evolves’ his defense mechanism. Okay, so he’s got his turret. How does he not burn himself to death firing it? Or worse explode himself when he mixes the gases? No, he was created by a Higher Power, that much I can tell you. I do not consider myself to be a ‘Christian’. I do not currently engage in any religion, but I am not an atheist either. I apologize in advance for any hurt feelings and for the most part did not try to hurt anybody. (Mr. High-and-Mighty-Holier-than-Thou had it coming to him, though)
If you value yourself at, oh, say, One hundred dollars, then everyone around you is worth the same amount as you because you are no better and no worse than the person next to you. So, if you’re worth one hundred dollars, then every time someone is born, then the world is a hundred dollars richer, and every time that someone dies the world loses a hundred dollars. Do I make the point clear enough? Also, that Higher Power that created the aforementioned bombardier beetle made you, and you are higher than that beetle, cool as it may be. That means that you ARE worth something anyway, no matter what others say.
I am an atheist. I do have a reson to be moral. I know that human life is valuable because it is finite and unique. Christians dont believe it is finite. They believe that once someone is dead they just go to heaven/hell. So they logically should have less value in human life.People think, people feel. To extinguish those thoughts, to cause pain, is just wrong. My morals come from me not some book written by whomever that can be loosely interpreted.
Hitler was not wrong just because. He was wrong because he killed millions. He cut short many many lives.
Might doesn’t make right in atheist beliefs. Christians show much more evidence of might makes right in say the crusades. They will kill or force their religion on people and many are intolerant of people who are different.