CentralNYGuy (78598)
Joined 2015-03-29
Submissions: 181 (89 featured - 49%)
Creations: 1173
Comments: 433

Submissions See All


Atheism is manifestly irrational.
The rules and laws of logic which must accompany intelligence if it is to be thought ineligible - , and the fact that these immaterial, universal, and immutable laws can not be accounted for in a nihilistic world view and epistemology, only a theistic one. If atheism is true - You're nothing more than a cosmic accident - a highly evolved animal derived from a piece of protoplasm which washed up on the beach one day for no reason whatsoever - Which means - there are no laws of thought - At least none that are not purely subjective and arbitrary.
Creepy Condescending Wonka
If the purchase restrictions above I alluded to did not exist. Yes.
Creepy Condescending Wonka
Part 2 A. “What proof do you have that your worldview is superior to others?” There is a ton of proof that it's superior. It accounts for and answers the most pressing questions that the greatest philosophical thinkers in history and no other world view can answer. Here is an expounding upon that topic. http://gloryfocus.com/2015/05/14/the-superiority-of-the-christian-worldview/ “ I wasn't asking about AIDS cases. “ You asked how homosexual behavior harms society. I gave an illustration of that “harm“ per your humanistic understanding of it. I know what you asked – & since there is no such thing as a homosexual “relationship“ in the romantic context, it was rightfully ignored. We have world views clashing here again. “ Last time I checked, monogamous couples don't spread disease. People who sleep around spread disease, whether gay or straight. “ Unfortunately that describes few to no homosexual relations. The CDC points this out. and also points to what it describes as other “sexually risky“ behavior by homosexuals, which includes anal sex. It also said health warning guidelines among homosexuals who contracted AIDS was actually quite high- but had no impact in them curbing risky sexual activity - demonstrating that this is an addictive perversion and not love. These are peversions – not “ loving relationships “ “ As for your third point: you're basically saying that even if you can't prove I'm wrong, I'm still wrong? “ I don't have a clue where you're getting this from and I”m completely baffled. You'll have to expound upon it. “ It sounds to me like you're trying to control the debate by controlling the definitions of words.” I haven't tried to control anything – What I have done is pointed out your circular reasoning and attempts to qualify value terms using other value terms – and then you fail to qualify the definitions of those terms * within * your naturalistic world view. “ Every time I use words with known, clear definitions, you say that my worldview can not justify or qualify those words.” That's correct. & I have more than explained exactly what I mean by that. I have argued abortion and homosexual behavior is harmful, you have claimed it's not. This is an example of what I mean. “ In essence, you're saying my position cannot be defended because I'm using words which you claim I supposedly can't be using. “ That's not at all what I'm saying.
Creepy Condescending Wonka
Part 1B. “The things done by Hitler, Stalin and Mao did not benefit their respective societies“ According to most in Nazi Germany who supported Hitler & were in “ general agreement“ - genocide of the Jews would benefit society – Just as atheists like you think subjectively that abortion & homosexuality benefits society. You see how “subjective“ and/or “arbitrary morality“ works taken to it's logical conclusion? “ Molesting and murdering children for fun does not benefit society. “ Which if true is completely irrelevant, because that morality equals the “benefit“ of society is an assumption anyways. I'd agree that morality *ultimately* will benefit society, but what that looks like within my world view & yours are entirely different issues. What that looks like in a progressive world view is rampant homosexuality, abortion on demand, & 50 different genders. “ So that means slavery is still okay, since the New Testament never prohibited it. “ It does prohibit it as it was known in the US slave trade, (Exodus 21:16) but even if it didn't. This is what's known in logic as an argument from silence fallacy. “Then please explain the difference.“ Objective means not influenced by personal feelings or opinions. Absolute means a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things. e.g. Time, culture, societal convention, etc.. “So which rules apply to Jews today?“ All those with moral application. However, those laws today only serve to curse them. Before Christ they were keeping them while holding out for the future promise of the messiah. They rejected that promise – So the law became a curse to them. “ Which rules apply to non-Christians? “ All those with moral application, but like the Jews, those laws only serve to curse them unless God grants unbelievers repentance.
Creepy Condescending Wonka
Part 1A “What is your standard for qualifying the term "harm"?” The word of God -The bible. “I prefer the method that reduces as much as possible any possible pain.“ So if Hitler committed genocide against the Jews with a less painful method – That would've made what Hitler called “The Final Solution“ moral? BTW, Most of these abortion procedures have more than proven to cause pain to babies being aborted. “But they still account for some.” Which still doesn't argue for it being legal for most – which is what abortion advocates attempt to do with their consistent bait & switch methods. . “ Proof? “ According to the pro-abortion rights Alan Guttmacher Institute 94% of all abortions occur for “social reasons” (that is to say that the child is unwanted or inconvenient) rather than medical reasons or sexual assault as the primary argument for abortions. https://www.guttmacher.org/international/abortion “And you know this how?“ By statistics of atheists supporting progressive politicians & their policies. This is not to say no atheists are against abortion, but most are for it. Most are also for homosexuality. This is a verifiable fact. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/23/u-s-religious-groups-and-their-political-leanings/ “ I was working under the assumption that you understood what these words mean; words like benefit, harm, etc. “ What a word may “mean“ & what the implications of that meaning is within a given world view are different issues – As the word “harm“ & the immoral positions you have consistently supported & jettisoned from the application of this word –clearly attest. To clarify. I'm telling you abortion & homosexuality are absolutely “harmful“ to those practicing these immoral behaviors or participating in them, & that “harm“ goes far beyond mere humanistic harm, but also spiritual & psychological harm your world view does not afford you. “ You replied to the first sentence and completely ignored the second one.“ I ignored it with good reason - because it's irrelevant. “My second sentence said "If enough people have an arbitrary morality which is in general agreement, then society can still benefit.” I know what it said, which is an irrational unsupported assertion. Either you fail to understand the term “arbitrary“ you're irrational enough to believe this, or some other possibility I haven't considered. (Continued)