Reg the Fronkey Farmer

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 2,791 through 2,805 (of 2,852 total)
  • Author
  • #3088

    Thanks Noel, I highly recommend this book by Carlo Rovelli. It is easily understood in the same way the video of the Brian Cox lecture in the “Coffee Break” is. I learn a lot from both of them as they help me to conceptualize the ideas and then I can study and develop them further.


    Atheist Ireland along with the Evangelical Alliance of Ireland and Irish Ahmadiyya Muslims have just made a written submission to the United Nations challenging human rights abuses in Pakistan. Next month Atheist Ireland will address these issues at the UNHCR in Geneva. Read Me.


    Have a great week everyone!!

    It’s a strange myth that atheists have nothing to live for. It’s the opposite. We have nothing to die for; we have everything to live for. – Ricky Gervais.


    It’s only natural that a hard Brexit will follow a hung parliament.


    I know where you are coming from Simon. It is just that when you say “You have to remember I’m talking about God’s love and the ways in which an evolutionary theory of morality translates into theology” you should qualify it with something like “Christians might say that…..” Ok, maybe I am being a bit tedious but I want “passer-by’s” to know it is two (very moral!) atheists in discussion.


    Sorry Simon but you are still sounding like a Christian apologist when turning theologian to explain what you think their gods’ love means. God’s love does not exist because God does not exist. If people believe that they are having a personal relationship with the Creator of the Universe then they are suffering from a delusion. Therefore any moral framework based upon “God’s Love” is unsound. It means all actions are carried out under the threat of punishment or the expectation of reward. That sentence alone displays the very weakness of faith based morality. It removes much of the role of personal responsibility.

    Atheists (i.e. non-believers) must build their moral framework though on-going discussions and self-development. It is an active endeavour. Faith based is too passive. All they need to do is read the same 2000 year old pages over and over. Don’t swallow your moral code in tablet form as Hitchens once said. It does not lend itself to further development and anything that may spring from theology, in order to improve it, is no longer faith based. It belongs in the secular realm. I can see no merit in using or claiming to need the Bible as a source of moral instruction. Whatever it may offer is too basic to warrant embracing because it is not “god breathed” as it was written by Bronze Age men over 2000 years ago. Morality is not a set of absolute rules. It is an ever evolving process that has no need for any religious input. We are way past all of that.


    do you really believe we can do without the rule of law?

    No, I am not even talking about the rule of law. I am talking about morality.
    People will co-operate for the group but people can still compete for “selfish” reasons and still be ethical (or moral). I can even compete “unfairly”, with complete disregards for others but that does not mean I need to break the law.

    I could take advantage of weaker people but I do not do so. Not because of the law of the land or any absolute morality “god inspired” rules. I do not do so because of my own evolved and well understood code of ethics. If anyone ever tries to enforce their moral code upon me then they better have a big police force as I live my life according to my own standards and my own rules. Neither the church nor the state informs me how to behave. I do as I wish.


    It comes down to the two main kinds of love offered by God….

    Simon, this sounds like you talking as if the Christian god actually exists rather than reporting what theists believe. Gods do not exist so “he” cannot offer anyone any kind of love. It might make theists feel all warm and fluffy to believe the Creator of the Universe loves and values them. However it is a delusion. Therefore developing a code of morality from what someone believes the Creator of the Universe would approve of is bunk.

    Morality needs a policeman”

    Only if ones moral code is written in stone and considered to be absolute. The only people who think like that also think they are being constantly watched by the all-seeing eye in the cosmic sky. When Christians ask me “What is stopping you from committing murder if you don’t believe in (their) god” I am glad they have a moral policeman. They only prove how immature and unconsidered their standards are by asking such a dumb question. If their belief in a god stops them from murdering people, then please keep believing.

    Unfortunately as shown one again in our old stomping ground in Borough Market, it also takes a belief in god to commit murder so easily. To quote Voltaire “Those that can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities”. It is the self-appointed policemen that do this.

    Morality does not need policemen. It needs teachers and informed conversations about it. A proper education on Evolution and Critical Thinking will allow us to become much more ethical people.

    Victor Hugo — ‘There is in every village a torch – the teacher; and an extinguisher – the priest.’


    I was getting a bit jaded towards the end of a solo 10k last thanksgiving weekend. This song (who Jimi said was a better guitarist!) just started on my Walkman and half way through blended with the band of Harley’s that breezed past me and parked up here. I covered the last mile planning another move to another country.


    “At least in Christianity, in the idea of God and through Jesus, there’s the idea that each individual is valuable and loved by God”

    How can the idea of feeling valued and loved by a non-existent god offer anything of substantive value? At best it is an attempt force people to behave in certain ways. It is based upon the reward and punishment system of Heaven and Hell. Even introducing the “naughty step” concept to small children, which might compel them to think about the outcome of their actions is of more use.

    The idea of “men dominating women” was not always the case. These ideas permeated into societies because most governments were religiously dominated by kings appointed by gods and religion was and still is, a useful tool for controlling large groups of people. In recent times religions have begun to move towards the concept of equality but this was not inspired within their own organisations. It was driving by having to accept the ideas of modern ethics formulated by Humanist and non-religious movements.

    Now I hear churches, most still entirely male dominated, talk about the concepts of equality that they were forced to adapt in order to survive as if it was all their idea. This happened without people feeling valued and loved by a god that does not exist.


    Your very welcome Noel. It’s funny the way theists try to create even more gaps to fit their god into. Which sound better, a fender or a Harley?


    Well done. I kept my “Science Dog” pic as I look so handsome, don’t ya’ think?


    On reading the comments about embracing change I am reminded of a joke Hitchens once told:

    A Buddhist monk, visiting New York City for the first time in twenty years, walks up to a hot dog vendor, hands him a twenty dollar bill, and says, “Make me one with everything.”
    The vendor pockets the money, and hands the Buddhist monk his hot dog. The monk, after gobbling down the dog, asks for his change. The vendor looks at him and says, “Change comes from within.” With a wistful smile, the monk walks away.


    Have a great week everyone!

    What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?

    – Sherwood Rowland, climatologist.


    I was talking with a friend recently when “Imagine” by John Lennon started to play in the background. I told him that Lennon had the lyrics the wrong way around and that they should be “Imagine there is a Heaven, it’s not easy if you try”.

    It is because the religious mind-set is so embedded within society that even some Atheists don’t notice it. Moving from an outlook based on faith and dogma to one of reason and critical thinking takes time. It is not a simple process for we have to invest time and energy into educating ourselves and sometimes need to relearn how to think without “god” clouding our thought process. We have to be alert to old ways of thinking confusing us (if we were religious) and spotting them for what they are. We need to be able to say “That is how I used to think because of indoctrination”.

    There are many big questions to be asked in life and they require meaningful answers. The biggest has to be what happens to us when we die. Religion offers to solve this by claiming all we need to do is believe that Allah or Jesus is real. Religion never has to prove this of course. It is the cornerstone of all faiths.

    By saying the words “I am an atheist” to yourself and contemplation of what that means if no small thing. As we contemplate death and what “The End” means we come to terms with our own mortality. To believe we are somehow different to other species, all of which we are closely related to, is escapism. As Atheists we do not have that comfort. We are not on our knees in the midst of the great delusion. The reason most people of faith have little tolerance for Atheists is not that we do not believe what they believe. It is having to entertain the possibility that we might be right! The journey of discovery into gaining insights into the reality of only living once is a journey towards becoming a stronger person.
    Atheism is the more mature position.

Viewing 15 posts - 2,791 through 2,805 (of 2,852 total)