The Non-Morality of Theism

I think the issue has more to do with religion than it does with theism.

Without a religion telling people what's right and wrong they are forced to use their brains to figure it out on their own.

Reply to JBeukema : The Non-Morality of Theism

The title seems promising enough. Theism is incompatible with Truth-based amorailty. All religions are deployed by societal leaders to promote ther societies particular version of moraility. All of these societally-sponsered versions of moraility are all false.

"I find that Abrahamic- primarily Christian and neo christian- individuals oft tell far more than they realize. Take, for instance, a common argument used by many such theists to argue the 'goodness' of religion."

These individuals are all mentally deranged and thier aguments are worthless. The Forbidden Truth is that religion is lie-based, and you cannot get Truth from lies. Religions are all ultra-addictive and toxic/ They destroy sanity and Truth. Religion is actually a mental health plague.
The only possible positions are :

A) Truth-based
B) Lie-based.

The entire argument given by god-myth-addicts is deranged in it's entirety, as only a god-myth addict could muster.

"This argument usually takes the form of 'how can one be good without god?',"
The whole idea of good, bad, right and wrong to any individual is invalid, lie-based and insane.

"where do your morals come from?' "
Society. These deranged and toxic lies come from society and societal leaders. They have no legitimacy.

"or, perhaps most frighteningly, 'I cannot see people being good without god."
God does not exist, neither does any legitimate concept of good and bad individuals.

"What is so telling about these words? Well, basically, what these people are arguing is that they cannot imagine anyone being 'good' without god- more specifically, that they cannot see how anyone can be moral or upright without the fear of hell."

Nobody can be "moral and upright", because these concepts are lie-based and have no Truth-based legitimacy. Anyone who believes that they are "moral and upright" is a fool, and an inferior who rejects Truth.
Unless youdefine "moral and upright" as simple being totally embracing of Truth, something a god-myth-addict can never be.

"Buddhists make a similar claim regarding Karma and reincarnation. Now, think about what they're saying here."
I don't need to. All religions are lie-based and toxic. All thier claims are false and unsupported delusions.

"They cannot see how anyone... including themselves... can be good... good being defined, as clear by the context as honest and not bringing harm... without fear of punishment."
Thats because they are inferiors who live thier live running from the Forbidden Truth. What they say does not count. Only Truth counts.

"Now, society has long recognized that some people will only be deterred from undesirable actions by the fear of punishment."
Society has no legitimate right to punish or pass moral judgement on any of its victim-creations.

"This is why executions have historically been quite public"
Incorrect. The reason was so that the citizen-slaves could relieve thier cathartic rage by witnessing another human being brutally and unjustly murdered without moral condemnation from society. Societal leaders have now realised that it is more efficient to have more of an "invitation" style excecution, and use other public barbaric TV programmes to fill the gap.

That is because society was starting to let it's illusion of decency slip with public excecutions. Soceital leaders simply made a slight adjustment to thier formula.

"and we in America make it well known that criminal behavior results in incarceration."
That is society's blatent way of threatening and terrorising citizen-slaves into accepting injustice in order to control and oppress them.

"However, most people will admit that such persons are a minority and that most people will try to be 'good' of their own accord, per their own conscience."
Your definition and entire concept of "good" is lie-based and wrong.
The reason they obey these incorrect "good" rules is because :
of fear of moral condemnation by society. As soon as society takes that away, such as in public executions, they will accept and embrace thier suppresed desire to witness and even perform murder with societal permission.

"Indeed, altruism is only natural,"
100% incorrect. It is not natural to be altruistic. What wild animal goes around being altruistic? How is needlessly murdering so-called criminals to ease the baying for blood altruistic? How are the oppressive and unjust laws altruistic?

"as it and the expectation of reciprocation have historically been good not only for the individual, but for humanity as a whole."
Wrong. Humanity is going down into the depths of failure an inferiority as I type these very words. Humanity is a mistake, and is devolving rapidly.

"For a more in-depth examination of these, do a Google search on the moral instinct."
There is no such thing as moral instincts. What a load. Morals are lies, invented by society. Because of this, morals are culturally relative. Can you show Me any wild snakes or spiders that have a "moral instinct"? Morailty does not come from nature, but man.

"These theists, however, make a different claim."
Thier claims are insane. Yours are not much better.

"Not only do they claim that such persons... persons who will only act in an acceptable matter if they fear a great enough punishment... are the majority, they claim that every single person is motivated to be good, honest, or altruistic purely out of fear pf punishment if they are caught doing something wrong."
That is fairly accurate when you consider moral condemnation. However, it does not matter. There is no legtimate thing as good and evil etc.

"Every person. Including themselves. Not only this, but most common forms of punishment are not enough o keep them in line. Fear of incarceration of even execution is not enough to keep these people in line. Only fear of an eternity of indescribable suffering is enough to motivate them,."
That shows you just how that specific part of the insane god myth is designed by socital leaders to threaten and terrorise god-fearing individuals to obey thier facist commands.

"These people admit, through their arguments, that they are either amoral or immoral."
They are immoral.

" For those not familiar with these terms, amorality is the lack or a personal sense of morality."

Truth-based amorality is not the lack of anything except mental derangement and societal programming against nature. Amorality is Superior. All the claims made by societies and religions to morality are false.

"Immorality describes one who acts without regard to morality, where amorality implies a total lack of a moral guide in the first place."
By societal definitions of what constitutes morality, amorality is actually the most Superior, Truth-based, logical and sane position of them all.

"Either of these scenarios should be quite frightening when one realized that these non-moral individuals, who either lack altogether any moral guidelines or would not be limited by them anyway are the very people who seek to not only claim a moral high ground, but who would then seek to push their twisted views of their so-called morality"
This statement is not quite clear enough for Me to answer.

"... the mere law of an ancient culture, which is founded on no moral or ethical code,"
Current laws are not founded on any Truth based and legitimate moral code, either. One example is the societally-sponsered murder of innocent womb-trapped children.

"as we have just discussed, into the public arena to influence our own laws. They are also the ones who wish to see these views instilled in children."

Society wants to wrongly install its false morality and spead the religious menace into all its child-slaves via the parent slave owners, schools etc. etc.

"This reality should be very unsettling to any thinking, rational person with a vested interest in their own well being or that of their children"
Nothing unsettles Me. I am used to hearing deranged religious rantings from members of society from all sides.

"their society, their nation, or humanity as a whole. Remember that the non-morality of Abrahamism has been seen in the past in the form of genocides, inquisitions, and witch burnings."
Just like christian and western societies do today.

"This is not mere speculation or philosophy. The results of such twisted views have been seen time and again over the past six thousand years of theist influence."

Yes, all religions are pro-war. Further, religions is a desease that attacks sanity and rationality. All societal leaders are in fact highly enraged mass-murderers. They use thier control, the religion systems to commit genocide on others for thier own pleasure and to satify thier own emotional needs.

"While we most oft encounter these arguments when dealing with Christians in the West, this same problem is seen manifest in all theistic religions that claim to take a sense of morality... indeed a misnomer, as they are unable to tell morality from mere law... from ancient texts and are willing to act I accordance to the alleged will of their delusions without regard to any sense of morality or ethics or any care for their fellow Man."

Well, that seems pretty accurate. Law is nothing to do with Truth-based morality. However, I make a point : Society has to care for it's citizen-slaves. The individual does not have any legitimate obligation to care for anyone. The idea of obligation on an individual to care for others is false, and immoral.

"This is perhaps the biggest reason we must oppose theism and the thinking that oft accompanies it, if we are ever going to see the existence of a more just society."

One of the major hurdles in un-doing the extreme toic and immoral state of society lies in the ending of the christian/god myth toxic plagues. However, that is not what will happen. The myth plague is too toxic and is so strongly supported by societal leaders.

I agree that religion is a form of insanity, at least in its most srvere form. Who else but a religious nut would have commited 9/11? Religion is not so much about saving us from hell as it is about power money and control. Religion is the greatest battle ever launched for the minds of men and women. The most important battle of this war is education. This is why they want to have their own schools and when possible control what is taught in public schools. I disagree with you that we should not be responisble for the welfare of the human race. This, along with freedom, should be the driving force of history. www freewebs.com/thomascrosthwaite/

Demonstrate that an objective 'Truth' exists.




altruism in nature - Google Search

animal altruism - Google Search



A mistake is an action, much like an accident requires an intent. Whose intent, whose plan is it?

,

it is impossible to 'devolve'




moral instinct - Google Search

evolution altruism - Google Search


I thought you just said that the 'Truth' was that there is no 'Truth'-based morality :dunno:

QUOTE=thomascrosthwaite (his words in blue)

I agree that religion is a form of insanity, at least in its most servere form.
This is an accurate and Truth-compatible statement.

"Who else but a religious nut would have commited 9/11?"Probably no-one. However, know that the individual is not responsible. He was only a tortured victim-creation of his society, and the insane god-myth. He was actually more accurately a "human weapon", deployed by a cathartically enraged societal leader who might not even believe in his religion at all.

"Religion is not so much about saving us from hell as it is about power money and control."Often this is the case, but for those who promote it. Those who are the addicts....they are victims of the lie.

"Religion is the greatest battle ever launched for the minds of men and women."Correct. What a clear, and excellent way of putting it.

"The most important battle of this war is education."Education systems are all designed to promote the god myth, some directly some indirectly. However, it is not an intellectual problem, it is a psychological disorder/mental defect problem. Only Forbidden Truth-based education could help, but no society would ever allow this.

"This is why they want to have their own schools and when possible control what is taught in public schools."

"I disagree with you that we should not be responisble for the welfare of the human race."I did not say that. I said individuals are not responsible, society and societal leaders are. There is no way any single individual could force society to refrain from war or religion, nor have an obligation to do so even if he could.
Consider a soldier on the battle-front. An individual. He is not responsible. He is not fighting his personal enimies in battle, but someone elses. He never met or was victimised by the so-called "ememy". He is a weapon of someone else.

"This, along with freedom, should be the driving force of history."
No society has ever or currently gives any legitimate freedoms to any citizen-slaves. All freedom is in the mind, and mental freedom comes from Truth.

So basically you're saying people shouldn't be responsible for their own actions?

QUOTE=Beukema

Demonstrate that an objective 'Truth' exists.
OK. Here is one (Although it is not a societally Forbidden Truth.)
1+1=2. That is a factual statement, and is 100% correct and pure.

If Truth does not exist, then all arguments are equal. Why, then, make any arguments and try and rationalise yourself? I argue that these "opinion" responses are simply the product of a lack of ability to fault My Superior arguments.

Perhaps you do not understand the difference between Forbidden Truth and personal Truth (True Reality).

altruism in nature - Google Search

animal altruism - Google Search
Too simple. No, wild animals are not altruistic like humans are. They may appear to be, but thier mental processes are not the same. They do not do thier actions under the same demented toxic mindsets as humans do.

Be aware that most information you are relying upon comes from humans, and human views on animals. Not the source. Nearly all human annot recognise and embrace the Truth, so thier sources and conclusions are largely irrelevant. All societies are based on lies, and serve up non-stop barrages of lies and mis-information to confuse you.

Be aware that any zoo animals, pets, breed animals, or human-contact affected animals can quite easily be toxicated by humanity, and perverted. Only wild animals count.

They may occasionally appear to be altruistic, but there are important differences :
1)They choose thier own action
2)thier action is not made by a mind affacted by human mental derangement
3)Thier action has some purpose or benefit
4)It does not go against thier nature or welfare to do so.
5)There was some personal motivation to do the action.

Altruism, as you use it, is an attempt to apply moral obligation. That is a false and toxic version of altruism.

"Altruism consists of unselfish/selfless acts in which the altruist puts other individual's interests before their own." -from your google search you gave Me.

By this definition, and considering My 5 points, no animal is ever ultimately altruistic.

Here is another item you include in your search :
"South Africa's co-operative mongoose, long held as a prime example of heroic altruism in the animal kingdom, is a selfish as the next beast.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/360255.stm"
There. Your own reference.

A mistake is an action, much like an accident requires an intent. Whose intent, whose plan is it?
The Master of Semantics strikes again. I am revealing the Truth that humans is a mistake in the evelounary cycle and are deseased and faulty. I mean mistake in terms of a fault and error. You know what I meant, Mr. Semantics.

"it is impossible to 'devolve'"Your argument is without evidence, or foundation. Devolution is not only possible, but it is occuring right now within the minds of the human species.


moral instinct - Google Search

evolution altruism - Google Search
More garbage. You simply take any information or text in google to constitute Truth. You are a supreme inferior. These articles are written by mentaly deranged Truth-hating humans like you.

I thought you just said that the 'Truth' was that there is no 'Truth'-based morality :dunno:
No, you don't. I never said that. That is why you types it, unlike your usual blue quotes. Society's definitions of moraility have no Truth-based value. There is a Truth-based version of morality....that is nothing like what society preeches. Society often calls this call this Amoraility.

Correct. Or to be more precise, the individual is actually not responsible for his actions. Society is. This is a Forbidden Truth. This is a 100% correct and concrete reality.

This is probably the most moronic thing i've ever heard.

Ok. Again, you do not provide any actual reasons for your reply. You just say "moron this", "Fool that" etc. If it is so moronic, then prove Me wrong (via arguments and logic, b the way).

mr. seer is ridiculous.. the little green men are feeding him nonsense.

The fact that I should even have to explain this means you lost this argument long before it ever began



People are responsible for their actions because they are the source or cause of their actions and they are able to act on their own.

What is this supposed to mean? Is it sarcasm? I cannot understand this. It makes no sense.

SO A is true because A is true and they can choose A? Circular logic.

Besides, by your statement, is society not responsible for ts actions, because society is the cause of its actions, too?

FF, your logic (if it deserves to be so called) is just terrible.

Yes, saying people are responsible for their actions because they are the cause of them is such terrible logic....:rollinglaugh:

Oi vey!

i tire of this seer.. he's just another carico it seems... it's a shame how we are surrounded by their type.. as he sits here complaining about society.. can you imagine the strain he puts to it... because no doubt. he feels we own him something. get over yourself travis.. it's terrible you cant see the fool you're making of yourself.

Reply mimidamnit

i tire of this seer..
You have the option of not replying.

he's just another carico it seems...
This statement is incorrect. All life-forms are unique. It is not possible that I am "like" anybody. Your inability to experiance Truth just makes it seem so.

can you imagine the strain he puts to it...
I like this statement. It is a Truth-based and correct statement. I am very pleased with Myself that I am causing society strain.

"because no doubt. he feels we own him something."
The Forbidden Truth dictates that society owes Me more than a billion dollars, a public apology for all My victimisations, a public apology for all My crimes, and to be installed as the Supereme Dictator of australia. And I have barely started.

Although I realise that this will not ever happen, I also realise that My Truth-based entitlement to these (and more) societal atonements is unaffected by societies immoral refusal to do so. It is not a question of what I need. I dont; It is a question of what I deserve.

Statements travis agrees with = truth based statements?

???


Get over yourself...seriously.

Here is an explanation of what makes something a Truth-based statement:

Imagine stacking a deck of cards, making one of those towers like on TV.
Each tower is an argument over an issue, that is relevant to the Forbidden Truth.
Each card represents a fact, form of concrete evidence.

Examples are : "good card" Scientific evidence that is thoroughly researched and does not conflict wth any other known knowledge or logical principal.

A "Bad card" : "Jesus wrote in the bible that it happened that way" OR "Fred saw it happen" OR "our society says it is so" OR "We must all do X, because we all do X".

Each analysis of each card, or fact, must NOT contain nor be tainted by any claim, institution of society, emotion, agenda, myth etc. Nor must it be itself from any such source, or require other facts it relies on of such nature.

It is also important how the "cards", or facts, work together.

The whole argument is then constucted. IF ONE CARD ALONE has ANY lie, myth, or societal taint then the whole lot comes crashing down.

If the tower stands, it forms a piece of the puzzle, a Forbidden Truth. The Seer does NOT stop there. The puzzle peices MUST all PERFECTLY fit with all the others to make a complete and flawless system of Truth-based knowledge and reason that never fails against any other Truth-based argument or real-world event as seen froma Truth-based perspective.

Then we have a Forbidden Truth.

THIS IS NOT THE ONLY THING YOU NEED TO MAKE YOURSELF SEE THE TRUTH. THIS IS WHAT CONSTITUES A TRUTH-BASED STATEMENT.

Okay so I will have to revise...

Statement Travis thinks is supported by strong evidence = fact?



Furthermore I will say that you don't really know what a fact is, at least not in a scientific context. Facts are observed instances. facts are that which are observably true. Beliefs, motivations, explanations, concepts cannot be facts. Facts are those which have real occurrences. We could say the american civil war is a fact, but the cause of the civil war is not a fact no matter how certain we are. An apple falls to the ground, this is an example of a fact, a theory which explains it would be gravity (relativity).

People who hastily label things as facts, i'm inclined to believe are fools. Furthermore You are not scientifically or historically adept enough to be aware of ALL of the evidence, both for and against much of anything for your labeling to have any relevancy to reality at all. Even I am not quick to call things facts.

Unfalisfiable position and matters of perspective also cannot be facts such as the abortion debate, moral issues cannot be determined as facts because all moral codes are unfalsifiable and based on a priori.