Atheism

I'd just like to point him towards Salem, MA in 1692, where nearly everyone thought they followed God's doctrine, and therefore made unquestionably good moral decisions.

I love what Penn Jillette has to say on the subject:

I HAVE ALREADY KILLED AND RAPED EVERY SINGLE PERSON I ACTUALLY WANT TO KILL AND RAPE.

The number of my victims is ZERO, and if your number is not zero you are sick and should be kept away from society.

If there's no Mom, what's stopping you from pooping your pants?

I helped out a random stranger the other day. Not gonna tell the long story but He kept saying God must have guided me and God must be looking out for me too.

I didn't want to get into with him but No bro. I helped you because I saw you needed help. And figured I was in a position to do so. I had some extra time that day and just happened to be where you were.

Wasn't God.

I help people when I can because why not ? The relief on someone's face is enough payment. Plus I feel guilty when I don't help when I can. Not from fear of damnation but my empathy requires I do something.

Strangers have helped me in the past. I know how much of a difference that can make.

It's just frustrating to have your own "good" behaviors constantly assumed to be caused by God.

No. I chose to help. Me. No one else was involved. Isn't that a better lesson anyway? That there are people who help from a place of support rather than fear of judgement. ? Or some divine force ?

I had a guy I worked with ask me “ if you don’t believe in god whats stopping you from raping and murdering people?” I said “because I don’t want to do any of those things” I definitely looked at that dude weird after that

I’ve always hated this question, because christians like the guy in the picture don’t draw their morality from the bible. They decide on their moral framework, then read the bible to find verses that support it. I don’t see anyone adhering to the mixed thread fabrics rule.

Empathy. How is this so hard to grasp?

If you need the threat of eternal punishment to be a good person, then you are not a good person.

This argument is the same that Kant made. Kant defended the notion that a person should do the correct thing for the sole reason that it is the correct thing.

A lot of those religious types scare me that one of the first things they'd do without consequences is murder and rape.

I'll entertain the spirit of the question.

Most "good choices" and "bad choices" are fairly easy to figure out. Would you want this thing done to you? If no, then do not do that thing. That's going to cover the vast majority of cases.

There are some exceptions. Sometimes one might need to balance the needs of the many against the needs of the few. Sometimes one might be presented with a set of all-bad options. Those situations are vanishingly rare, and usually limited to circumstances where group consensus can help one determine which choice is acceptable to the greatest number.

But it's not always easy, and it's not always clear. I actually had a version of this conversation at a wedding with a guy who had his master's degree in philosophy and another guy who was a devout Christian who was suffering a profound crisis of faith because his toddler nephew had just died of a brain aneurism.

The crisis-experiencing Christian asked me "Isn't it scary when there aren't clear answers?"

And my answer was "Yes, frequently. I often wish that there was an obvious or comforting answer to the terrifying conundrums of reality. But there often isn't, and it's my job as an adult to figure out what to do in those situations. Work out the moral calculus of what kind of world I want to create, try to work towards that world, and try to cope when reality won't cooperate in the ways that I wish it would."

Sometimes it's a cold universe out there, and you've got to build yourself a fire out of coherent philosophy to get through the night. Relying on dogma is a lot like a shot of brandy; it might make you feel warm for a while, but eventually the cold will get to you, and you've got to have that sustaining fire or else you're going to freeze to death.

I've thought about this a lot actually, but I figured it out. So when you're presented with a good choice and a bad choice, you go for the good one. Works every time.

just follow the golden rule :)

This argument has bugged me since the early 2000s. The guy who did the McDonalds Super Size Me (somewhat fake, I now understand) documentary got a stupid reality tv show and some dumbass christian (who had to live with a Muslim family for a month) asked the same goddamned question.

He also wondered if the family, while saying prayers in their native language, might be saying something like "death to america." You know, in front of television cameras during the height of our "war on terror." That's how fucking stupid these people are.

They are holding us back. If their fear and hatred couldn't be weaponized, we'd have a much nicer society.

The irony is that empathy is such a foreign concept, yet "love thy brother" is kind of a big highlight to that whole Bible thing.

That the point : we are choosing

Actually, applying a dogma is not being a good jew/christian/muslim. Theologists justify almost everything in "God let us choose between Good and Evil". Ironically, their is many learning in the thora/bible/quran that underline the need to not being dogmatic

As an atheist, I'm mad at how accurate this is