Total Posts:129|Showing Posts:31-60|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Does Morality Depend on Religion?

LB628
Posts: 176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 5:46:39 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Why has every poster assumed that in order for morality to involve religion it must involve a god of some kind? Religion assumes nothing more than a supernatural law, force, or what have you, not necessarily a conscious entity.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 6:17:17 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/5/2009 5:46:39 PM, LB628 wrote:
Why has every poster assumed that in order for morality to involve religion it must involve a god of some kind? Religion assumes nothing more than a supernatural law, force, or what have you, not necessarily a conscious entity.

Because the 3 major religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) are monotheistic. Their entire theology revolves around a deity (or is it 3? lol). "Supernatural force," rather than an athropomorphized deity, is more related to the Eastern religions.

I don't have as much a problem with the Eastern religions than I do the Judeo-Christian religions, and that's generally the ones that people attack when they say "religion."

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2009 11:25:47 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/5/2009 5:46:39 PM, LB628 wrote:
Why has every poster assumed that in order for morality to involve religion it must involve a god of some kind? Religion assumes nothing more than a supernatural law, force, or what have you, not necessarily a conscious entity.

Simply because the majority of religions posit one as foundational. Something to decree commands (essentially an appeal to authority) and something to direct worship to.
SirAntonyP
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2009 4:33:10 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
Morality doesn't depend on religion, if you don't want it to, religion is engineered to tell you how to live your life,

Me for one i am atheist and no religion decides my morals only me and my lifes experiences do that, i have a big conscience, bigger than most religious people might i add! and a good sense on how to treat people, if you need a book to tell you how to treat others then that book will just lead to big trouble, with people interpreting it in different ways, just like it does with any religion.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 8:21:02 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/5/2009 5:17:07 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/5/2009 1:36:50 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
In Conclusion, morality does not depend on religion but on GOD: THE Object.

At 9/5/2009 2:30:22 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Is one action (the giving of flowers to an elderly relative) morally above another (genocide) action?

So is something right because God commands it? Or does he command it because it is right?

‘You shall annihilate them - Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites – as Yahweh your God commanded you.' - Deuteronomy 20.11,18

So you believe that genocide is moral because Yahweh says so, correct?

It was moral for the Jews, then.
It was part of a (doomed) covenant of the flesh.
It now stands as THE example of what we Christians are to do Spiritually.
We are to annihilate every last trace of sin within ourselves.. even 'the little ones'.. the resentments and malices that we 'nurse' instead of putting to the sword. (God's word)

The scripture you have mentioned has become THE most important scripture to me.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 8:22:07 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/6/2009 4:33:10 AM, SirAntonyP wrote:
Morality doesn't depend on religion, if you don't want it to, religion is engineered to tell you how to live your life,

Me for one i am atheist and no religion decides my morals only me and my lifes experiences do that, i have a big conscience, bigger than most religious people might i add! and a good sense on how to treat people, if you need a book to tell you how to treat others then that book will just lead to big trouble, with people interpreting it in different ways, just like it does with any religion.

But we all get our morals from somewhere. Most of the time, from social learning. It's just indoctrination of a different sort.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 8:57:55 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 8:22:07 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/6/2009 4:33:10 AM, SirAntonyP wrote:
Morality doesn't depend on religion, if you don't want it to, religion is engineered to tell you how to live your life,

Me for one i am atheist and no religion decides my morals only me and my lifes experiences do that, i have a big conscience, bigger than most religious people might i add! and a good sense on how to treat people, if you need a book to tell you how to treat others then that book will just lead to big trouble, with people interpreting it in different ways, just like it does with any religion.

But we all get our morals from somewhere. Most of the time, from social learning. It's just indoctrination of a different sort.

And society is built on laws and laws come from the 10 commandments.
In short, you still have ALL of your work ahead of you.
The Cross.. the Cross.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 9:14:24 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 8:22:07 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/6/2009 4:33:10 AM, SirAntonyP wrote:
Morality doesn't depend on religion, if you don't want it to, religion is engineered to tell you how to live your life,

Me for one i am atheist and no religion decides my morals only me and my lifes experiences do that, i have a big conscience, bigger than most religious people might i add! and a good sense on how to treat people, if you need a book to tell you how to treat others then that book will just lead to big trouble, with people interpreting it in different ways, just like it does with any religion.

But we all get our morals from somewhere. Most of the time, from social learning. It's just indoctrination of a different sort.

Right. So clearly morality sometimes depends on religion, if you are a person who gets your morality from outside yourself. While if you are not, it does not depend on religion.
So prove me wrong, then.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 9:35:08 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 8:57:55 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

And society is built on laws and laws come from the 10 commandments.

This is so obviously false I had to respond to save the braincells of anyone reading... There were very advanced civilizations and SOCIETIES in the Indus River Valley, Babylonian area, and Egypt LONG before the 10 Commandments were handed down. In fact, Ur, the city where Abraham was BORN was one of the most advanced agricultural and metalworking SOCIETIES in the region at the time.

And if the Bible is correct, it was some nearly 500 years before the Exodus that we have direct biblical reference of SOCIETY, and almost a THOUSAND YEARS before that we can infer that SOCIETY existed because of the story of the towns and peoples destroyed in the great flood.

Good GOD man... use your brain!! God gave it to you for a REASON.

http://www.biblestudy.org... - the Ussher Chronology.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 9:41:05 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
@Tarzan

God has obviously inspired those people with moral rules.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 9:56:36 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 9:35:08 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 8:57:55 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

And society is built on laws and laws come from the 10 commandments.

This is so obviously false I had to respond to save the braincells of anyone reading... There were very advanced civilizations and SOCIETIES in the Indus River Valley, Babylonian area, and Egypt LONG before the 10 Commandments were handed down. In fact, Ur, the city where Abraham was BORN was one of the most advanced agricultural and metalworking SOCIETIES in the region at the time.

And if the Bible is correct, it was some nearly 500 years before the Exodus that we have direct biblical reference of SOCIETY, and almost a THOUSAND YEARS before that we can infer that SOCIETY existed because of the story of the towns and peoples destroyed in the great flood.

Good GOD man... use your brain!! God gave it to you for a REASON.

http://www.biblestudy.org... - the Ussher Chronology.

And the flood came BECAUSE of how utterly depraved and sinful everyone on earth was.. it was so bad only one family survived.
We may not use the word society in this context.

You're getting a trifle shrill again. Time for your nap methinks.
The Cross.. the Cross.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:05:23 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 9:35:08 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 8:57:55 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

And society is built on laws and laws come from the 10 commandments.

This is so obviously false I had to respond to save the braincells of anyone reading... There were very advanced civilizations and SOCIETIES in the Indus River Valley, Babylonian area, and Egypt LONG before the 10 Commandments were handed down. In fact, Ur, the city where Abraham was BORN was one of the most advanced agricultural and metalworking SOCIETIES in the region at the time.

And if the Bible is correct, it was some nearly 500 years before the Exodus that we have direct biblical reference of SOCIETY, and almost a THOUSAND YEARS before that we can infer that SOCIETY existed because of the story of the towns and peoples destroyed in the great flood.

Good GOD man... use your brain!! God gave it to you for a REASON.

http://www.biblestudy.org... - the Ussher Chronology.

There's also huge gaps. Are Christians suggesting that we have evolved technologically to this current stage in 4348 years? And that everything on this Earth is currently at it's current population after two of everything breeding?

And that ship building was advanced enough to store 2 of each animal, their food, and float despite huge flood waves? ?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:26:11 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:05:23 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 9/7/2009 9:35:08 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 8:57:55 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

And society is built on laws and laws come from the 10 commandments.

This is so obviously false I had to respond to save the braincells of anyone reading... There were very advanced civilizations and SOCIETIES in the Indus River Valley, Babylonian area, and Egypt LONG before the 10 Commandments were handed down. In fact, Ur, the city where Abraham was BORN was one of the most advanced agricultural and metalworking SOCIETIES in the region at the time.

And if the Bible is correct, it was some nearly 500 years before the Exodus that we have direct biblical reference of SOCIETY, and almost a THOUSAND YEARS before that we can infer that SOCIETY existed because of the story of the towns and peoples destroyed in the great flood.

Good GOD man... use your brain!! God gave it to you for a REASON.

http://www.biblestudy.org... - the Ussher Chronology.

There's also huge gaps. Are Christians suggesting that we have evolved technologically to this current stage in 4348 years? And that everything on this Earth is currently at it's current population after two of everything breeding?

Yep.

And that ship building was advanced enough to store 2 of each animal, their food, and float despite huge flood waves? ?

Yep.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:05:23 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:

And that ship building was advanced enough to store 2 of each animal, their food, and float despite huge flood waves? ?

Actually it was seven of each type of kosher animal and only two of each type of non-kosher animal.

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool? Who cares it's not like logic will ever come into it.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:35:43 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Nope. Two of every animal would limit the pool to only one gene pool after the first generation; genetic degradation would occur almost right away, since there is not enough new genetic material to keep the DNA stable.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:46:58 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:35:43 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Nope. Two of every animal would limit the pool to only one gene pool after the first generation; genetic degradation would occur almost right away, since there is not enough new genetic material to keep the DNA stable.

Wrong. You are going by TODAYS gene pool which is highly degraded.
Back then the pool would have been very healthy.
Oh... and even if this were not true we can, at any time, (SEEINGS as we arguing from a Biblical perspective) say 'God did it'. (preserved the species through His Supernatural guidance)
The Cross.. the Cross.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:50:38 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 9:41:05 AM, Kleptin wrote:
@Tarzan

God has obviously inspired those people with moral rules.

Except me.
So prove me wrong, then.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:54:43 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:35:43 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Nope. Two of every animal would limit the pool to only one gene pool after the first generation; genetic degradation would occur almost right away, since there is not enough new genetic material to keep the DNA stable.

That's right. It would undoubtedly lead to mass extinction across all species on that ark. I remember that Kent Hovind argued that because of the canopy of something or other between pre-flood and post-flood, the UV rays of the sun impacted DNA, which is why the animals on the ark had some sort of super DNA.

This is the problem when idiots listen to other idiots. UV rays cause the formation of thymine dimers in which adjacent thymine nucleotides in the DNA bind to each other instead of their constituent partner nucleotides. The mechanisms by which sunlight alters DNA is negligible when applied to furry mammals because their skin and their hair make them less susceptible.

Furthermore, there is no safeguard. There is no such thing as "Super DNA" because there is no way to make DNA more resistant by itself without completely changing the way DNA works. It's ludicrous XD
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:55:25 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:46:58 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Wrong. You are going by TODAYS gene pool which is highly degraded.

How is it? I see no evidence for this.

Back then the pool would have been very healthy.

Not with two of every animal, which is what we're talking about.

Oh... and even if this were not true we can, at any time, (SEEINGS as we arguing from a Biblical perspective) say 'God did it'. (preserved the species through His Supernatural guidance)

"God did it." Typical.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 10:59:25 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Especially not since the first thing Noah did after getting off the boat was slaughter and sacrifice a bunch of animals...
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:00:05 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:59:25 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Especially not since the first thing Noah did after getting off the boat was slaughter and sacrifice a bunch of animals...

Must have been the dinosaurs. That's why they aren't around today!
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:09:47 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:59:25 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Especially not since the first thing Noah did after getting off the boat was slaughter and sacrifice a bunch of animals...

One's he had brought along for the purpose: Pretty smart guy Noah.
The Cross.. the Cross.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:13:49 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:55:25 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:46:58 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Wrong. You are going by TODAYS gene pool which is highly degraded.

How is it? I see no evidence for this.

Back then the pool would have been very healthy.

Not with two of every animal, which is what we're talking about.

Oh... and even if this were not true we can, at any time, (SEEINGS as we arguing from a Biblical perspective) say 'God did it'. (preserved the species through His Supernatural guidance)

"God did it." Typical.

God is holding every atom in the entire universe in place at all times.
If He wasn't holding every aspect of YOU (apart from all the stupid choices you keep making) in His hand you'd BE IN HELL.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:15:15 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 10:59:25 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Especially not since the first thing Noah did after getting off the boat was slaughter and sacrifice a bunch of animals...

That's an awesome idea. I've always wanted to eat the last of some animal.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:30:34 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:15:15 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:59:25 AM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/7/2009 10:30:36 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

Is it possible for a species to recover from such a limited gene pool?

Especially not since the first thing Noah did after getting off the boat was slaughter and sacrifice a bunch of animals...

That's an awesome idea. I've always wanted to eat the last of some animal.

Interesting..
The Cross.. the Cross.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:38:04 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:15:15 AM, Kleptin wrote:
That's an awesome idea. I've always wanted to eat the last of some animal.

I've always wanted to eat a Dodo. They seem tasty.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:42:20 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:38:04 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 11:15:15 AM, Kleptin wrote:
That's an awesome idea. I've always wanted to eat the last of some animal.

I've always wanted to eat a Dodo. They seem tasty.

Part of the pidgeon Genus. And they WERE eaten to extinction.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:56:10 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:38:04 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 11:15:15 AM, Kleptin wrote:
That's an awesome idea. I've always wanted to eat the last of some animal.

I've always wanted to eat a Dodo. They seem tasty.

Apparently they were horrible, very greasey and full of bones. They were not actually hunted for food because of this!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 11:58:48 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:56:10 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Apparently they were horrible, very greasey and full of bones. They were not actually hunted for food because of this!

I still want to eat one. Can you imagine saying to someone, " I just ate an extinct bird?"
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/7/2009 12:00:01 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 9/7/2009 11:58:48 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 9/7/2009 11:56:10 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
Apparently they were horrible, very greasey and full of bones. They were not actually hunted for food because of this!

I still want to eat one. Can you imagine saying to someone, " I just ate an extinct bird?"

Or some fried Dodo egg. Scrambled Dodo, anyone?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.