Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Kris P. Bacon, Jul 29, 2022.
I don't. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of your own position. Are you able to address it?
So supporting laws against theft, rape and murder, make you a religious lunatic?
Dude, you really need to figure out what it is that you are arguing and quick jumping all over the place just because you know you can't defend your position. But as for your new line of argument, no. Supporting laws against theft, rape, and murder does not make you a religious lunatic. Supporting laws against blasphemy does. Supporting God's purported commands in the Bible to murder children does. Supporting the Bible's account of rape laws (death for raping a married woman, but just having to marry your rape victim if she isn't yet married) does.
Yes you do. Address that.
"Evangelical" has developed into something of an adjective, describing how a person acts (similar to an evangelist) in areas other than religion. It refers the the fervor and passion one uses to convince another of something.
Looking up the word itself on Merriam-Webster I found:
Here are a couple of other sources for better understanding.
Pretty much each generation finds those of the ones before them too strict, and those of the ones after them too loose.
We are talking about America today. Not about a six thousand year old Jewish tribe. But I do believe that our values come from the same God as they. The differences I don't understand. I suppose that in the future they may yet change again for a variety of reasons. Who knows. What I do know is that God is real, he lives and is divine. I also know that everyone knows him but has forgotten him.
Not everything is based strictly upon a religious foundation. Morals against theft and murder and such are pretty universal, regardless of what the religion is, or the lack thereof. And even some atheists are against SSM and homosexuality, but not for religious reasons. So some laws, that used to be (and technically still on the books in some areas), such as no Sunday business hours save for certain ones, are no longer, especially since there is no one Sabbath in the US, not to mention those who are not religious. Even among the Christians alone, there is no consensus on what laws should and shouldn't be on the books, especially those that are strictly religious in nature.
There is an underlying problem however in that version of religion may have worked well before we were able to closely examine the substance of religion it really fails us today in that science simply cant tell you murder or stealing is in any way a bad thing. Science can identify everything about it but it cant make a moral valuation, that is in the eyes of the beholder, as it is a religious determination.
While not 'everything' is a religion virtually everything is a religion since there is so much that is simply valuation and outside the scientific realm of analysis.
I get your meaning. But the longer I live, the more I realize that the former values were better for the most part. And that rejecting them in mass is to have thrown the baby out with the bath water.
What is a personal moral?
Personal morality refers to the principles and rules individuals personally live by and believe to be morally right and sound. Each of us has a personal moral code. This may not be legally or ethically sound, but according to each of our moral values. Personal morality stems from an individual's conscience.
Jul 31, 2021
What is the Difference Between Reflective Personal Morality and ...
https://pediaa.com › what-is-the-difference-between-reflec...
What is the relationship between religion and moral motivation?
What is the relationship between religion and moral motivation? a. Religion is required to motivate us to do the right thing.
Ethics - Unit 2 Flashcards - Quizlet
https://quizlet.com › ethics-unit-2-flash-cards
This is the secular version of the substance when one asks what actually is religion.
The source of morals is not relevant to religion, ethical philosophies become morals/religion when when people follow them.
Much of our lives is religious and we are non the wiser because few people have ever been taught the difference between philosophy, morals, ethics, religion unless they studied exactly that.
When we start adding these definitions up we can see where durkheim is coming from!
The 'only' thing that is classified as your 'religion' (regardless the source) are the beliefs you can actually 'exercise', the rest is nothing more than a banterfest of ethical philosophies.
You have the right to exercise only guv approved religion in the land of the 'free'.
Where did you get that idea that we blame God? Why would anybody blame an entity they don't believe exists?
Who is pushing to make religious beliefs illegal? Is that hyperbole or do you actually know of such people around here in modern western society? I have yet to come across any such person.
I think that most biblical values were improvements over what came before in that particular society, but that codifying them as religion has stood in the way of further moral progress and improvement.
I think millennials and Gen Z are less loose than the generation before them.
They are having less sex. They have less freedom to run around. They are more authoritarian, more groupthink, more fragile, and less freeminded, pushing cancel culture and virtue signaling as strong as the ultra strict Christians of the 50s did.
These young generations are LESS lose than that of the 80s and early 90s. That generation got off on breaking all taboos, and pushing the envelope as far as they could. Far less so now. Somebody may be offended.
I think you need to review the post that you quoted and this response again. They seem rather non sequitur.
semi-hyperbole. I have actually met people who are calling for religion to be illegal, but even among the evangelical types of atheists, it's not a common goal. I've no doubt that many more might like that, but they don't necessarily espouse it.
I was more speaking to the overall perception of each generation with regards to the others. Obviously there will be those who use the terms "strict" and "loose" differently, and have different views as to what is more or less than what it was. A lot of the boomer generation sees GenZ as being loose sexually. Whether that is true or not might well depend upon perception. Are they having less sex, or are they being more careful and having less babies? Most are having sex outside of marriage, even if it is less than the previous generation did, and that is still loose morals by the standards of some previous generations. A lot of this is simply perception, especially when it comes to morals. Hell there are still some people out there who think it's immoral for interracial sex or marriage
They are having less sex. Much less. It has gotten to the point in some places where population numbers are likely to decline as a result. Japan is the prime example.
We also have MGTOW on the rise, heterosexual men who don't want to deal with women at all. Polar opposite of free love promiscuity of the 70s. More and more men are walking away from dating.
So uncommon that I have never even heard of it except from religious people imagining it. And I have spoken with many anti-religious people. Not one of them said they want it illegal. And for good reason. That would only make it worse.
Ah yes. My apologies. I quoted the wrong post. That was meant for Injeun and not you.
My best(?) particular encounter occured at a Pagan Pride event. I must say that nothing is more entertaining than watching one of these evangelical atheists have a go at both a pagan (I think the guy was a druid, but it's been many years), and a Protestant at the same time.
But it's obviously common enough that the phrase has achieved multiple entries in the Urban Dictionary.
I would like to meet one and pick their brain.
I have met many anti-religious people, and used to be more anti-religious than I am today.
It only takes ONE
The stalin purges, I guess you missed interviewing him.
From 1932 to 1937 Joseph Stalin declared the 'five-year plans of atheism' and the LMG was charged with completely eliminating all religious expression in the country. Many of these same methods and terror tactics were also imposed against others that the regime considered to be its ideological enemies.
Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Persecution_of_Christian...
Maybe you just need hearing aides?
it's liberal logic, and liberal morality. It has no, or low common sense.
besides, it's part of their woke, politicially correct, Anarchist/ Socialist utopia Agenda.
Separate names with a comma.