collapsedwave

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks Yes, that's the point, us being "assigned value" is the only way it's objective for us. We can't assign it ourselves. Which is why anytime we try, it becomes subjective, & leads to everything mentioned previously. Sorry, but this is the logical high ground.

@collapsedwave1 @wendelltalks You do know that God is a subject, apparently assigning us, the objects, with value? Innate things aren't bestowed by outside sources. Innate value might just be an oxymoron.

Atheists cannot even agree whether morality is objective, subjective, or an evolutionary illusion.

@MW4Liberty Romans; a letter to acquire missionary support from Rome. Personally I don't believe it belongs in the new testament at all.

This. All this.

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks For morals to be objective all human life must have value. Humans cannot assign value as that would become subjective. Value must be derived from somewhere else. Humans being made in the image of God is the only thing that provides innate value. There is no logical fallcy there.

You made the positive claim that morals can't be objective without God. How arrogant. Pure dogma. You have no argument to back up your claim. None of you ever do. If I claimed "you can't have objective morals if God exists" or "innate human value requires us not being made in the image of a god" you would expect me to be able to back up those claims... No? Here, I'll demonstrate for you: P1. If human worth is grounded in bearing God's image, then human worth is derivative. P2. Innate worth is... by definition... non-derivative. C. Therefore, if humans have innate worth, their worth is not grounded in bearing God's image. See how that works?

@waldocalrissian @wendelltalks They kill people to eat them.

@collapsedwave1 @wendelltalks I don't agree that reducing humans to food reduces human worth. Humans only have worth while alive. Dead bodies are just material and meat only has worth in that it can sustain the living. As long as we treat the living as having worth cannibalism does not promote any of that.

@waldocalrissian @Ponch1620 @wendelltalks Tell me what's immorral about cannabilism, within that society.

@collapsedwave1 @Ponch1620 @wendelltalks Your fallacy is: the argument from consequence. Morals are subjective. The potential negative consequence of that fact is not an argument that it's not true.

@PolyCrusader @coyoteancap @SwipeWright Not to mention they've run millions of generations of bacteria and can't get a "transformational change". Also, there's the whole life from non life head scratcher.

See, but now we're conflating. That's adaptation. It's still bacteria. Evolution is the idea that something can become something else entirely. What studies like that show is that gene's and cells have adaptive mechanistic function within em. What they don't show is that the bacteria became something that wasn't bacteria to combat the antibiotics. And if you gave it more and more time, it would still always be some form of bacteria. And with the time scale issue, I believe the new mathematical models demonstrate that the universe isn't even old enough for us to be this far evolved. Not even close. (I could be wrong on this, I haven't delved to deep into that yet.)

The evidence for evolution is absolutely overwhelming.

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks How arrogant. How can morales be objective without God? (Innate human value requires that we were made in the image of God)This demonstrates you haven't thought this through to the end. My entire point.

What's the P and not P? That's how you demonstrate a contradiction. So far all you've espouses are dogmatic claims with no argument to backup anything. I'm looking for: P1. (Assume morals are objective and God doesn't exist) P2. (Demonstrate the contradiction) P3. (Or more if needed) C: Therefore objective morality cannot exist without God.

@JCrikets36515 @wendelltalks As expected, a fundemental misunderstanding of free will to muddy the waters of what a universal moral ethic is. Morales don't protect people, they just set the standard. Ignorance is only bad if you demand to defend it.

When was the last time god protected people under such circumstances. You state nazis divine hiddenness was not there. You theist bring up Mao and Marx. Once again morality of the divine is to protect individuals against such circumstances divine hiddenness was again absent. Three straight issues within 50 years of each other. With zero divine hiddenness morality. You can claim god was there and it was evil. We claim egoism made people do bad shit. Because that is exactly what happened to the Bolsheviks and what happened to the people who rebelled against Mao. Egoistic people did egotistical bad shit to people.

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks You're the one who keeps shifting the goal posts, I was pretty clear and simple. Without inmate human value morals are subjective, which lead to justification for evil. It's communism, cannabilism, everythythat is group rights over individual.

Show me the Bible passage that says "God gave people free-will and would never violate it"... Lol God makes people do stuff all the time in the Bible. Joshua 11:20 [20] For it was the Lord’s doing to harden their hearts so that they would come against Israel in battle, in order that they might be utterly destroyed and might receive no mercy but be exterminated, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks I already did, you're speaking but not listening.

Surface level issues like the supposed omnibenevolent diety who makes people eat their own children as a punishment for disobeying him. "Logic dictates" lmao please enlighten me with the contradiction that comes with morality not being objective. Even better, enlighten me with the contradiction that comes with God not existing and morality being objective anyway. If God decided we were no longer valuable, would we still have innate value?

@HansMahncke A purposefully manipulation towards group rights over individual rights (the greatest we've seen in this generation). The great reset is real & we're not even sure we're out if it's stranglehold.

I had always wondered why Fauci seemed determined to drag the pandemic on for as long as possible. At the beginning, it was obvious why. It made him the most important man in America. It also helped damage Trump politically. And all the while, it distracted attention from the fact that the virus had come from a lab he had funded. But why did he keep it going well into the Biden presidency? I think we can now see the answer. He had no intention of surrendering his position as the central figure, disappearing from the front pages, or giving up the power and adulation that came with being the man everyone looked to each morning. In the end, we got a never-ending pandemic not because of medical necessity, but because Anthony Fauci needed to feed his own narcissism.

@CCPISASSH0E He even looks like the guy who ratted all his neighbors out, to the gestapo, for an extra ration. I feel like there's a precedent for this,kinda rymes with hang'em good!?!

I don’t think I’ve ever hated anyone as much as I hate Anthony Fauci

@jimmy_dore I was almost fired from my position because I was aggressively advocating that we should still serve children during COVID (children & family services). I was met with "they are a high risk group" because they weren't eligible for the vaccine yet. True madness!

“Science” intentionally poisoned & damaged children’s hearts for profit. Children had ZERO risk from COVID yet they poisoned them anyway. No big deal. This will never be reported correctly, nor will anyone ever be held accountable. Most people will never even acknowledge any of it because to do so would require them to realize they acted like evil monsters.

@Tim0riginal @wendelltalks I'm no theologian btw. I was an atheist for most of my life and argued the surface level issues dismissing what I never studied. Logic dictates that morality cannot be subjective, which means humans must have innate value. That can only stem from being made in the image of God.

@collapsedwave1 @wendelltalks Right but who made them eat their sons and daughters?

@wil_da_beast630 SNAP is a subsidy for the major food producers, especially the ones peddling sugary garbage. It's actually not complicated to see how this country is being ruined, corruption, corruption, corruption.

You can feed yourself for a week on the median hourly wage.

I'm not saying Fauci is the only person responsible for the carnage of the last few years. I'm just saying it would feel really good to have him in the dock at Nuremberg 2 and turn up the pressure until he rats out some of the other people involved. We used to be a proper country

@lporiginalg The woke mob are thugs and should be treated as the threat they are. No tolerance.

@ericweinstein Moral relativism seems to be the fight of our time. I've started to feel out how many people around me fall into this category and it's absolutely appalling. By its nature, moral relativism crushes the individual.

Those of us bitterly opposed to communism fall into two different groups. A) Those who argue that it must be abandoned because it has show us that it doesn’t work. B) Those of us that are so bitterly opposed to collectivism applied to dissenting individuals that we are relieved that it *cannot* work. A happy accident. Those who don’t care if it *could* be made to work: we’d continue to fight it. Working or not working is irrelevant. It’s just bad. Period. The end. If Communism could actually be shown to deliver stable high levels of growth and innovation, broadly distributed, with low inequality, I believe I would still fight it to my dying breath. My opposition to communism has little to nothing to do with the fact that it doesn’t work as an economic system. So, it’s merely a relief that it doesn’t work. A convenience for its opposition. Communism and collectivism are intrinsically soul killing for people who are hyper-individualistic . So let’s stop hiding behind the fact that they don’t work as economic or governance systems. Some of us who aren’t the biggest fans of naked capitalism red of tooth and claw, hate communism not because we think capitalism is intrinsically fair. It isn’t. We oppose it because communism hunts the individual. For us, It’s not communism vs capitalism. That is a businessman’s argument. Instead, it’s communism vs individualism for me. Show me a system that fights harder to let a dissenting individual thrive more than brutal market capitalism (which also barely works), and I am all ears. Not everything is a market after all.

@AaronSiriSG NY enters the chat: "we've won on appeal to lock you up indefinitely, without trial, if we deem you unhealthy". I'm sure it will be heard by the supreme court sometime in 2050.

Even if Fauci was an angel and got everything correct, nobody's rights should be contingent on the opinions of a public health official.