www.ucf.rivals.com

nuknight_01 #fundie ucf.rivals.com

[Religious people have caused untold death and suffering throughout history. Brush up on your history.]

Just because history is on my side doesn't mean that you need to ask me to go back and read history.

Think of it this way, the "why do you act in a moral manner" function is recursive. You're trying to make your way to the exit condition. You will never exit the recursive loop with an atheist world view. This is because "Because I said so." isn't a valid exit condition. That would be because anyone can apply that ambiguously and after that there really isn't much left to talk about is there? That's the point I'm trying to make. It is an ends versus means argument and doesn't make the case for a creator or any deity. The majority of people can instantly see the case for a creator based on the contingency of existence. The debate comes down to the nature of the creator/creative force, etc. But out of this debate comes practical issues. Issues that many atheists who are actually very interested in moral behavior (that's a good thing), cannot adequately side step.

nuknight_01 #fundie ucf.rivals.com

I don't think people have a problem with other people's beliefs. It's much more the tone with which atheists proselytize that gets people's feathers in a ruffle.

Besides that there are some obvious logical pitfalls to atheism. One possible logical problem with atheism is that if there is no God, then what ultimately forms the grounds for the claims of right and wrong? Is right and wrong formed upon the consensus opinion of the moment? If you change your mind that something such as unilateral warfare for profit is no longer wrong and everyone in the room agrees with you, then it's no longer wrong? If you've ever heard Chemmie pontificate, then you'd realize that right and wrong in his mind are as simple as what he thinks must be true. Same seems to be true with Tommstein. Ack!

But just because there are logical inconsistencies, which are possibly axiomatic in nature, with an atheist being preoccupied with right and wrong, it does not mean that they are in fact not preoccupied with it. And that's fine. But if they ever truly realize the liberation from morality that their position allows them, then I'd be worried. Sure there have been Christian tyrants. But their actions are in opposition to their professed beliefs. An atheist tyrant is doing what is allowable under his belief system. Two quick examples are Pol Pot and Stalin.

Next page