The atheists need meaning so they try to become good people by being liked and doing good deeds. The problem is that they or a group of them decide what a good deed is or who are the good people by consensus or group think. The group may decide it is good such as Hitler’s Germany who said they needed to weed out the weak and infirmed for the greater good of society. Same with our society that says it is better to kill a baby than to bring it into poverty even in a country that prides itself on upward mobility. The group may decide it can destroy a business if it decides the business isn’t satisfying some arbitrary goal they set up which makes them a good person. The society may define what is living a good life and what is not by brainwashing that society into an agenda driven set of morals to make those people try to become good people.
43 comments
"they try to become good people by being liked and doing good deeds"
This is the only part of this rant which makes sense and basically is true as well. The rest.. well let's say: If you're trying to accuse atheists of immoral behavior by this reasoning, you should put away your mirror...
How else would you decide what a good deed is except by consensus? Nazi Germany wasn't really an instance of consensus decision-making, but of the unjust use of power.
There is a broad general consensus among people about what is wrong and right.
"An agenda driven set of morals". What agenda could a set of morals have, except to maximise happiness and minimise suffering?
It seems to me the real target you should be focusing on is not consensus-based ethics and morals, but authoritarian power structures.
Ironically, what do the theists offer? An authoritarian power structure.
"The problem is that they or a group of them decide what a good deed is or who are the good people by consensus or group think."
Because it's so much more sensible to base your idea of what is right and wrong on texts written 2-3 thousand years ago.
"...so they try to become good people by being liked and doing good deeds."
Uh, you're bearing false witness, there, dearie, because you know damn well that the thinking behind helping the poor and the sick, as Jesus taught, and Hitler's genocide/eugenics, are not equivalent. But it's interesting to note the mental gymnastics you use to minimize your own selfishness and hypocrisy by denying the genuinely charitable nature of others who do the work you should be doing if you claim so loudly to follow Jesus.
Oh, and removing a clump of cells is not "killing a baby".
So, you think you can just sit on your ass while advocating (and voting for) the rich, big business, and cutting social welfare programs (which is one reason some women have abortions), but you're still automatically a "good person" because you believe in God, but atheists who actually do things to help those less fortunate than themselves are bad people, trying to become "good", or convince themselves that they are?
Perhaps you should re-read the Sermon on the Mount.
The Nazi's were majority Catholic, you moron. You know, one of the many religions that requires unquestioning obedience to insane and self-contradictory doctrines, otherwise you will be punished FOREVER! If groupthink led to Nazism, then religion had more to do with it than anything to do with atheism.
Also, fuck off with the abortion shaming. If you fundies didn't have such a hate-on for sex education and contraception maybe the USA wouldn't have such high abortion rates compared to every other developed nation. And if you think the USA has good social mobility then you are especially deluded.
Yes, except athiests don't claim that what Hitler's Germany did was good.
As for abortion, how many times does this have to be clarified. I don't say that it's "better to kill a baby than to bring it into poverty." If it's not my body, it's not my decision.
I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "decided the business isn't satisfying some arbitrary goal." Isn't it you right wing fruitloop type that think businesses should be left to their own devices to sink or swim regardless of the potential damage a failure would cause?
My life is full of meaning, I don't have to try to give it meaning.
I do try my best to be a good person, by treating others as I want to be treated, by aiming at making people happy and content, by not harming anyone mentally or physically.
What part of "Gott mit uns" (God is with us) don't you understand, Bray? Where is the atheism in that sentence?
Many large groups (the ones called "countries") have some kind of constitution in place, to protect against the down-sides of democracy. They also have laws to protect against smaller groups or individuals acting out what they think is good, but which harms other people.
Once past the first sentence that doubts that atheists can honestly and innately be good people, this post is just stating the obvious and adding in a dash of hysteria. All societies decide what deeds are good and what deeds are bad by "conensus or group think." And the standards are all too often arbitrary. The author simply fears the result unless people who think just like him are making the rules. That's a pretty common fear and imho hard wired in our biology.
The society may define what is living a good life and what is not by brainwashing that society into an agenda driven set of morals to make those people try to become good people.
Which is different from what fundies do because...
While obviously not limited to atheism, that is actually a real problem with subjective morality that has been the subject of vigorous philosophical debate. Seems reasonable to discuss it.
Not that theism has any better answers, mind. "I imagined someone told me via really vague and indirect means what is right, and I sorta think that someone probably knows something I don't?! And yet I just behave according to my own conscience regardless of what my holy book actually says" is not an improvement over, well, any moral system. Still, not exactly fundie material...
And I thought that was what fundies do....
Irony meter isnt fixed yet, thank the FSM, or it would have exploded again.
The way it is, only a little puff came out of it
they try to become good people by being liked and doing good deeds.
How awful! They shoud be ashamed of themselves.
It's much better to go the fundamental Christian way: go out of your way to make everybody hate you and call any good deeds a commie liberal conspiracy.
Jesus is preparing your reward for you right now.
You are totally making sense here. It would be much better to base our idea of good deeds on what we can find in the Bible. In fact, we should base our justice system entirely on what's found in the Old Testament. A married woman gets raped? Stone her, alongside her rapist, that'll teach the adulterous slut. An unmarried woman gets raped? Force her to marry the rapist, after all, a woman should only have sex with her husband. And of course, we definately need to start passing laws about how men can cut their hair.
/sarcasm.
The funny thing about Hitler's Germany is that most people thought of themselves as Christians and believed they were doing God's work. Hitler claimed to be doing God's work a lot and people believed it because, well, they were stupid and gullible.
It isn't any different today, and atheists are the only ones immune to this kind of bullshit.
So, your advice to avoid the possiblity of genocide and other horrific acts is to believe in the God of the Bible, a collection of tales in which the character, God, performs genocide and other horrific acts.
first sentence: your point being?
what problem?
godwin
dude, we don't kill babies, we eat them, remember?
like drilling oil wells in national parks?
like what you're trying to do?
i don't need justification: i do what i like to do, so long as my gleeful mischief doesn't harm others (or inconvenience them too much)
"The group may decide it is good such as Hitler’s Germany who said they needed to weed out the weak and infirmed for the greater good of society. Same with our society that says it is better to kill a baby than to bring it into poverty even in a country that prides itself on upward mobility."
Abortion was illegal in Nazi Germany, just like it will be in your racist reich.
Bray? I can decide what is good on my own.
Oh, and here's what has you pissed off. YOU CAN'T DECIDE FOR ME.
Now go away, Malfoy.
Which group sounds more like Nazis: A group which promotes free thought with no central control on ideas; or the group which insists on strict and rigid adherence to a set of beliefs to the point of excluding and demonizing those who don't share those beliefs, believes themselves to be superior just because they happen to belong to that particular group, and insists on forcing these beliefs on the entire world?
The group may decide it can destroy a business if it decides the business isn’t satisfying some arbitrary goal they set up which makes them a good person.
You're talking about the American Family Association's many boycotts, aren't you?
The society may define what is living a good life and what is not by brainwashing that society into an agenda driven set of morals to make those people try to become good people.
Now you're talking about fundamentalist Christianity.
It's been a long damn time since the US has prided itself on upward mobility.
@nazani14: they only do it when the richest fraction of a percent of the population need to explain why paying any taxes at all is an intolerable burden. Then they and their sycophant supporters break out the American flag pins and cue the crying eagles to start blubbering.
It's not even the 1% that are the problem, really. It's more like the 0.0001% The predator class, I suppose you'd say.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.