Originally posted by carpedm9587
View Post
As I noted, there is a simpler explanation than "god did it," especially in the face of the fact that god cannot actually be shown to exist.
And you are right back to Technique #1. At least you're predictable. Seer, your continued objection that "there are no objective right answers" is just a restatement of a definition. I honestly do not know why you do not see this. You don't have an argument. I've already agreed there are not objective right answers. You continually repeating this doesn't answer the fundamental question you need to answer: why is this a bad thing? You also need to show that there actually IS an objective/absolute standard, and you never have.
Maybe - and who cares?
Maybe - and who cares?
It's actually not a "morass." I can explain exactly why Pol Pot's moral framework (assuming his actions matched his framework) was askew. Anyone who values what I value (life, liberty, happiness, trust, etc.). Will see the argument immediately. Those who do not will not. Since most of humanity does value those things, most of humanity will understand and agree with the arguments, and Pol Pot will be resisted. It's not really all that complicated.
Well - that is the human condition, Seer. Welcome to the world. And creating/inventing a god does not actually change the fact that you are in the same place. The only difference between us, Seer, is that I know I am doing the best I can, and you think you're doing the best that can be done. I find your view a little dangerous.
Actually, I have put forward two arguments. One is based on the inconsistency of your own position. The other is based on the fundamental things people value (life, liberty, happiness, trust, etc.). Cut either way, you end up accept LGBTQ relationships as "just another form of human love." When your basis for morality is "the bible says so," then you end up where you are.
Fortunately, "the bible says so" is losing its grip on humanity.
Comment