I didn't say atheism and morality are mutually exclussive.  But if you make up what I didn't say, it is easy to refute.

However, while not saying they are mutually exclusive, I do believe that if there is no "external" body demanding conduct, the only morality is your opinion and the popular opinion of the time.

Who says I can't steal?  Why should I listen to you? It is only my bosses stapler

You may call me elitist to say that people are not versed in logic, but I have one question for you:  Do you really believe that most of the people you know are well informed and logical?

Second question, if you don't mind:  Do you believe people are doing a better job at educating themselves than 30 years ago?

I shall indeed correct you.

The Roman Empire (and the Republic) was far from a secular state. It even had an official state religion pre-Christianity, and the values of its religion were retained in its laws.

The Magna Carta is implicitly Christian and not really much to look at by today's standards.

The English have been religious since before Christianity. Whether it was the religion commonly called "Druidry" today or the religion called "Asatru" today, the British Isles were steeped in religion. Even Beowulf shows the clash of religions.

Brehon law also has strong pre-Christian religious elements.

To show how powerful the Asatru influence was on English-Germanic peoples and how deeply they were steeped in it implicitly, you need look no further than the days of the week:

Tuesday (Tiw's Day -- you might recognize Tiw as the Norse god Tyr
Wednesday (Woden's Day, a/k/a Odin
Thursday (Thor's Day)
Friday (Frigg and Freya's Day)
Saturday

Absence of Christianity is not the same thing as absence of religion!

As for hypocrisy ... I'm sorry but we're not all the same. We're not all as tall, as fast, as smart, as honest, etc. Something that is suitable for one person might not be suitable for another. College classes have prerequisites. People who don't have the prerequisites can't take the class because it is (rightly) presumed that without those prerequisites they could not benefit from the class.

By definition, half of the people in America have an IQ below median. It is ridiculous to expect me to play basketball like an NBA star or for someone with an IQ of 75 to understand chemistry as well as a chemistry professor with an IQ over 140.

And IQ, incidentally, is a strongly inherited characteristic.

It is insane to look at what the top 1% of the country in terms of IQ can do, and apply those expectations to the other 99%, just as it would be insane to expect all of us to slam dunk.

Is that elitist? Honest? Both?

I just know that all you have to do is look around you at an aggregated out of wedlock birth rate of nearly 50% (much higher in some communities, a little lower in others) to understand that when people threw off religion -- they made a total fucking mess. Their religion became: "What I want must be right because it's what *I* want."

Lots of little Adolfs in the making out there.

American society has become "less religious" over the last 50 years in the sense that there is a greater emphasis on morality stemming from within a person as opposed to morality being a standard set by God which each person must measure up to.

This is a current theme in pastoral training regarding what the (protestant, evangelical) church needs to provide to the congregations in the form of guidance. It's being noted that this trend is greater  and growing in people born in the 80's and later.

The problem's symptoms are that agreeable standards of conduct between people and in groups are being replaced by the idea that every situation is different and that actions cannot be determined to be right or wrong in themselves , but are dependent on who is involved and why things happened the way they did. In other words 'morals' are becoming fluid and will change depending on the person. which really means they dont exist.

Remember, this is a trend noticed WITHIN the church, amongst its members. That has been the case with non-religious or secular persons for some time. You cant get 10 atheist in a room to agree on anything firmly except that religion is bad.

Our society has not improved over the last 50 years. Overall there has been a decline that runs parallel to the trend of people thinking that morality comes from within. It does not.

Belief in god is not the problem. Institutions are. After they grow to a certain size they cease to be beneficial overall and become the source of serious trouble, whether it be a church, goverment, company, bank, motorcycle club, rock group (Jesus have you seen Arcade Fire? There's like 75 members in that band. one fucker just holds a single drum a hits it on the 2 and the 4. It's horrifying) or whatever.

Mankind has suffered from the atrocities committed by chuches, but also by secular organizations. But those without religion i.e. a standard of morality outside of themselves that they must aspire to, have not been the saving grace of the world. More likely they have been the source of harm to others.

Star Trek is a fantasy, not a prophesy.

I'll grant you some of the low level noise and chaos indeed has religious motivations. That is clear.

However, in terms of blowing up the planet, it seems quite as clear the motivation there will be resources, money and power. "I need that land to run MY pipeline, or syphon the water to hydrate MY fields, to feed MY subjects so they don't riot like the Tunisians, so I can hold onto MY POWER."

My God is the same as everyone else's God, we just understand it differently. Fuck you too! lol

You must be new here .


Priapus doesn't figure things out.
He can only dream  to be as smart as a broken clock.
 Like most mentally ill, he doesn't recognize  sarcasm or
his own most obvious shortcoming, the irony in his name .
 

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?BoardID=39&SortBy=DateCreated%20desc&Search=You%20reap%20what%20you%20sew,%20NC&SearchType=1&Author=Priapus53&DayFrom=600&DayTo=0&MessageID=124808&frmSearch=1#124808