Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Richard Dawkins stripped of 1996 Humanist of the Year Award...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    No. I don't think being nice to transgender people is a big change.
    For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

    No, of course you don't.

    ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
      To my mind if humans are genetically predisposed to be altruistic, then that can be a valid reason why being altruistic is a part of objective morality. The fact that all humans are genetically predisposed this way by virtue of evolution selecting for it in a herd species, is then the truth of the matter that causes everyone to agree on it, in the same way the sky being blue is the truth of the matter that causes everyone to agree on it. As a result, humans would agree that being altruistic was moral and it would not vary as a matter of subjective opinion.
      Like I said in the past you can claim that it is an objective fact that men act in certain ways. But you can not then jump to saying that there are objective moral truths. And not all men agree on morality. Like I said earlier most cultures did not make spousal rape illegal until fairly recently. When did it become an object moral wrong? And BTW the color of the sky is not mind dependent - morality is. And by definition you can not call your argument objective. As I explained. But it is good to see you groping for universal moral truths - it reflects the law of God written on your heart. And the image of God breaking through, a bit...
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post
        . But it is good to see you groping for universal moral truths - it reflects the law of God written on your heart. And the image of God breaking through, a bit...
        Which universal truths are these to which you refer as being written on our hearts? The subjugation of women perhaps, the killing of witches, the slaughter of indigenous inhabitants of countries invaded by Christian powers? Etc. etc. etc.

        Or perhaps you are referring to the fact that our "moral truths” are a product of the evolution of necessary social behavior to survive as cooperative intelligent social animals and which have demonstrably varied from culture to culture over time as social values adapt and change.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

          Or perhaps you are referring to the fact that our "moral truths” are a product of the evolution of necessary social behavior to survive as cooperative intelligent social animals and which have demonstrably varied from culture to culture over time as social values adapt and change.
          Tell that to Star, he believes in objective moral truths...

          Which universal truths are these to which you refer as being written on our hearts? The subjugation of women perhaps, the killing of witches, the slaughter of indigenous inhabitants of countries invaded by Christian powers? Etc. etc. etc.
          I'm sorry can you tell me where Christ and the New Testament writers taught us to do those things? Or modeled those behaviors?
          Last edited by seer; 05-01-2021, 05:52 AM.
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • Originally posted by seer View Post
            Like I said in the past you can claim that it is an objective fact that men act in certain ways. But you can not then jump to saying that there are objective moral truths.
            You keep seeming to shy away from the obvious logical conclusion of premises you agree on. You agree that evolution has made humans agree it is good to be altruistic. So you can understand why being altruistic is something that is found in the moral codes of every culture and isn't something where one culture arbitrarily says one thing and another arbitrarily teaches another. Instead, there is an underlying reason for the widespread agreement, because it's not a product of arbitrary human whim.

            But you are so fervently wedded to your false belief that humans must need God for morality that you pretend to not acknowledge the above. Because if you did, you would see that humanity doesn't need God to tell them altruism is moral, and manages to universally believe that altruism is moral without God being involved.

            Like I said earlier most cultures did not make spousal rape illegal until fairly recently.
            In addition to the two core moral principles of fairness and caring for others that are shared universally, different cultures add other arbitrary ideas including delusional religious teachings which cloud the issues. Even given the same set of general moral principles, two people can differ as to how to apply those principles to a specific situation. If their understandings of what 'marriage' is differs, their understandings of what the place of women is in society differ, and their understandings of what 'rape' is differ, then even given the same set of general moral principles their views of how best to apply them to a specific topic like marital rape can differ. Christian society in the West has supposedly always embraced the principle of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", but only relatively recently has marital rape been viewed as a severe violation of that principle, where previously it was not thought to be.

            When did it become an object moral wrong?
            If you want to judge the bible objectively morally wrong due to its failure to condemn marital rape, and in fact its ambiguously positive words about it in Paul's letters encouraging women to submit to their husbands in this, then I agree with you.

            Although compared to the Bible's failure to condemn the 3 worst moral evils of genocide, torture, and slavery, its failure on marital rape is pretty minor.

            And BTW the color of the sky is not mind dependent - morality is.
            So is rationality, intelligence, qualia, meaning, etc. Everything important in the universe is mind-dependent.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by seer View Post

              Tell that to Star, he believes in objective moral truths...
              What are the objective moral truths ‘written on our hearts’ – as quoted by you - that enable Christians to do terrible things to those under their control? (See below).

              I'm sorry can you tell me where Christ and the New Testament writers taught us to do those things? Or modeled those behaviors?
              Given that countless generations of Christians subjugated women, slaughtered the native inhabitants of countries they invaded, denied equal rights to all citizens, notably blacks – you tell me.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                You keep seeming to shy away from the obvious logical conclusion of premises you agree on. You agree that evolution has made humans agree it is good to be altruistic. So you can understand why being altruistic is something that is found in the moral codes of every culture and isn't something where one culture arbitrarily says one thing and another arbitrarily teaches another. Instead, there is an underlying reason for the widespread agreement, because it's not a product of arbitrary human whim.
                But like with our chimpanzee cousins we also find rape, murder and theft practiced universally in the human family. The problem is that you are using a fallacy. Argumentum ad Populum. That because the majority say A is wrong, A must be objectively wrong. And again, the moral relativist could state what you did about - Carp used to make the same argument. Why bring in moral realism? And I will remind you even if moral realism is correct these objective moral truths are completely impotent they add nothing to the discussion.

                But you are so fervently wedded to your false belief that humans must need God for morality that you pretend to not acknowledge the above. Because if you did, you would see that humanity doesn't need God to tell them altruism is moral, and manages to universally believe that altruism is moral without God being involved.
                Well that doesn't follow does it since Christians believe that men's best moral inclinations are a reflection God's laws written on our hearts. Without that we remain amoral beasts.

                In addition to the two core moral principles of fairness and caring for others that are shared universally, different cultures add other arbitrary ideas including delusional religious teachings which cloud the issues. Even given the same set of general moral principles, two people can differ as to how to apply those principles to a specific situation. If their understandings of what 'marriage' is differs, their understandings of what the place of women is in society differ, and their understandings of what 'rape' is differ, then even given the same set of general moral principles their views of how best to apply them to a specific topic like marital rape can differ. Christian society in the West has supposedly always embraced the principle of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", but only relatively recently has marital rape been viewed as a severe violation of that principle, where previously it was not thought to be.
                I have no idea what your point is. That Christians have not always lived up to the teaching of Christ?

                If you want to judge the bible objectively morally wrong due to its failure to condemn marital rape, and in fact its ambiguously positive words about it in Paul's letters encouraging women to submit to their husbands in this, then I agree with you.
                Give me one text that would support spousal rape? You can't, and you know how Paul taught husbands and wives to treat each other. So I can only see your above statement as deeply misleading,


                So is rationality, intelligence, qualia, meaning, etc. Everything important in the universe is mind-dependent.
                Not the point. It is the difference between between objective and subjective. The sky exists apart from minds, ethics are mind dependent and therefore subjective.

                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • So who agrees that Dawkins ought to have been stripped of an award he got a quarter of a century ago?

                  I'm always still in trouble again

                  "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                  "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                    Given that countless generations of Christians subjugated women, slaughtered the native inhabitants of countries they invaded, denied equal rights to all citizens, notably blacks – you tell me.
                    I will ask again, can you tell me where Christ and the New Testament writers taught us to do those things? Or modeled those behaviors?
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post

                      I will ask again, can you tell me where Christ and the New Testament writers taught us to do those things? Or modeled those behaviors?
                      Well I suggest you look to the multiple generations of church-going Christians who exhibited those behaviors. Were they wrong?
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                        Well I suggest you look to the multiple generations of church-going Christians who exhibited those behaviors. Were they wrong?
                        All you are telling me Tass is that men are wicked. But I will ask again, which NT teachings were they following? It was not the teachings and example of Christ that caused those behaviors, but ignoring them. But in your world these were no big deal, it is all relative - right?
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post

                          Well I suggest you look to the multiple generations of church-going Christians who exhibited those behaviors. Were they wrong?
                          Oh my goodness! Humans acting like ... humans. Doing what they want to do. And a tacit admission that they are behaving in direct contradiction to how we should and were instructed. Who would have ever thunk it
                          smiley hair-fire.gif



                          Btw, do yo agree or disagree that Dawkins ought to have been stripped of an award he got a quarter of a century ago?

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment



                          • Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post

                            Why do you think we've seen more people identifying as gay over time? Isn't it because of societal acceptance? How can you distinguish between young people coming out as trans because they believe a path exists for them to transition and be accepted and young people who don't know any better following a fad? If you can't distinguish them, why take the pessimistic view? Also transpeople are significantly more prone to suicide than the average person, so I suspect that's part of the reason there aren't many older transpeople.

                            Human sex is binary in that two sexes exist to produce offspring, same as most animals, but it's a spectrum in that genetic and prenatal variation can result in abnormal sex characteristics, whether that's a combination of genitalia or an atypically self-sexed mind. Ignoring rare outliers for the sake of a generalization may seem practical but it's not scientifically accurate.

                            "It does not follow that a little girl who likes playing with trucks, climbing trees, and making dens is a boy trapped in a girl’s body anymore than a little boy who likes dressing up in his mother’s evening gown, playing with dolls, or baking cakes, is a girl trapped in a boy’s body. They are simply children doing what children do. "

                            I would expect any mental health practitioner involved with transpeople would be rather insulted at the implication that they can't distinguish between tomboys and transmen. This is related to what I was talking about when I wanted to you to consider the alternative to the trans-rights movement's reality, that medical professionals the world over would have to be utterly incompetent at the most basic foundation of their area of expertise for transitioning to be wrong.

                            When I say a transwoman is mentally a woman”, that is specifically not me saying "a transwoman is neurologically a woman". Identification is beyond physical brain differences, at least to our current understanding of brain cell functionality. The scientific indication I referred to comes in the form of, for example, correlation of cerebral aspects or twin studies. You agree with me that there is no way to definitively categorize brains into "male" and female", so what's stopping you from reaching the conclusion that brain variance exists beyond a sex binary? Why can't that variance result in trans or nonbinary people? Why isn't a woman-identifying mind justified in participating in women's spaces regardless of their body?

                            Within the context of pop-feminism, an idealistic but ignorant liberal might, for example, see powerful women utilizing patriarchal power structures as feminist even though the feminist ideal would be the dismantling of those power structures. My consideration of feminist ideals is context dependent, so while in one context it might be equal pay, in another it would be the elimination of the capitalistic work concept.

                            I believe that women perpetuating objectification/patriarchal precepts is beyond the scope of the thread, especially since it's just as common amongst ciswomen as it is transwomen as far as I can tell.

                            The problem with not considering transwomen literal women is that you are making that determination with an arbitrary standard. Why is genitalia or chromosomes superior to mental identification? The vilification comes from the needless cruelty of working against trans acceptance by designating people in the most disadvantageous way possible for no suitable reason.
                            I have to note that you have not provided any scientific and/or medical data in support of your comments.

                            I am totally in favour of trans rights but no trans man will be a man and no trans woman will be a woman. Elliot Page [formerly Ellen] has had his mammary glands removed and feels much more comfortable as a trans man. I am very happy for him. But Elliot will never be able to produce sperm and father a child.


                            My original comment therefore holds true we will have agree to disagree on some of these points.

                            However, I will make a couple of points. One of my main concerns that trans issues whereby men are saying they are women are now dominating feminist discussions and that as a result other less “trending” and "sexy" topics are being relegated and/or ignored.


                            These include dealing with the impact of this pandemic on women who have lost their employment, and/or who have been [very often with their children] forced back into homes that may be abusive, incidents of sexual violence against young women at universities and in schools, police violence against peaceful [female] protesters, more flexibility on working hours which for some include the need for the improved provision of child care.

                            It seems that this issue [trans rights] has become [for many - and which I deem the herd] a belief system and that systems appears to be led by fanatics. Anyone who questions their sacred opinions is deemed heretic and will risk being subjected to the most vile language and threats which, according to the perverse logic of that herd, is entirely their own fault.

                            Whatever happened to the right to disagree?

                            "It ain't necessarily so
                            The things that you're liable
                            To read in the Bible
                            It ain't necessarily so
                            ."

                            Sportin' Life
                            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by seer View Post

                              All you are telling me Tass is that men are wicked.
                              No. What I’m telling you is that morals and ethics evolve and vary from culture to culture over time. There is NO single absolute morality.

                              But I will ask again, which NT teachings were they following? It was not the teachings and example of Christ that caused those behaviors, but ignoring them.
                              People of faith have a long history of reading the bible so that virtually any perspective on changing social issues – from the denigration of women to slave-ownership - will find some and justification e.g., slavery was justified in Colossians 3:22, (and elsewhere): “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor…”. But slavery is not justified by Christians nowadays and accordingly the bible is interpreted differently.

                              But in your world these were no big deal, it is all relative - right?
                              …and equally relative in your world. See above.
                              Last edited by Tassman; 05-03-2021, 11:47 PM.
                              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                Oh my goodness! Humans acting like ... humans. Doing what they want to do. And a tacit admission that they are behaving in direct contradiction to how we should and were instructed. Who would have ever thunk it
                                There’s no “tacit admission” by Christians of humans behaving badly except in retrospect based upon evolved social values.
                                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Starlight, 07-24-2021, 09:58 PM
                                26 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seer
                                by seer
                                 
                                Started by seer, 07-20-2021, 12:05 PM
                                153 responses
                                755 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 07-16-2021, 07:39 AM
                                76 responses
                                418 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Mountain Man, 07-05-2021, 04:27 PM
                                74 responses
                                445 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by tabibito, 06-30-2021, 02:53 AM
                                50 responses
                                336 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X