ksredna

Where to find a quality clinic for a through STD testing and exam? Blood, culture, swap and visual check of genitals, mouth and skin?

The people who claim that moral can only come from god has a problem if they use the Bible or the Koran as the source from which we should get our moral.

Assuming that humans does not have ability on their own to see the difference between what is right and what is wrong.

Then humans would not be able to tell if the moral code to be followed should be the one revealed in scripture A or B. Even if these were mutually contradicting and incompatible.

Furthermore then humans would not be able to pass judgment on the details on specific details in the Moral code revealed in the true moral code scripture. All would be equally important and morally valid. We would not be able to say that the commandment not to eat shrimp is more or less important than not having other gods or not desire a wife of another man or not having gay sex. Or that love is the central moral code. How would we be able to say so? We would, if we used god's moral code as given in the Bible, have to accept that we should stone adulterers and people who worked on a sabbath, k*ll all enemies without mercy, beat our children, turn the other check and love our enemies etc. We would have to accept all biblical laws in full without exceptions.

The moment you claim that we can say any of the biblical commandmenta are to disregarded because we find it appalling, then you contradicts the assumption that humans can only get it's moral code from god.

The problem with claiming that we can only use the scripture as basis for our moral code is that it advocates such a horrible moral and the very fact that we can determine items in the code as horrible and inhuman contradicts that we can only get our moral from god e.g. scripture.

Of course you may say that we does get the moral code from god via scripture, but that it is in some way inspired or imbued in us. But then how can we know that what we feel based on this god imbued or inspired feeling of moral is from god and not from humans?

Skitz, since the dawn of written history, every culture has morals, are you now trying to say that all were divinely inspired?

 

Could it possibly be that morals are indeed the development of the collective subconscious?

 

Your challenge is to INVENT a moral code. What makes you so certain that moral codes were handed down from an invisible being up there rather than being developed?

Written history is a very recent event in human evolution. Moral did not emerge with written history or culture. If they where necesary prerequisites, then we as a species would never have got as fra as having a written or any other history.

"Morality, then, is “firmly rooted in sentiment.” For those who feel that culture and religion contain the answers to moral questions, De Waal points out that organized religions are only a few thousand years old. There is no reason to think that human psychology has changed much since religions arose. The deeper point De Waal makes, repeatedly and effectively, is that the “building blocks of morality clearly predate humanity.” Even though moral rules tell us when and how to express our empathy, our capacity to be empathetic has “been in the works since time immemorial.” - http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/10/04/empathy-and-thus-morality-predates-modern-moral-codes-a-review-of-frans-de-waals-our-inner-ape/"

And oh, do not bother throwing the problem back at the theists. KILLING ANOTHER HUMAN BEING IS BAD BECAUSE GOD SAYS SO.

 

So atheists, why is killing another human being bad? Is it bad even? How about stealing? How about cheating?

We are as most other primates social beings. We live in societies and are dependent on collaborations. We do compete, but the ability to collaborate is to a large extend what gives us competitive edge.

Moral is derrived from our biology, It evolves in a social debate. In the discourse it has been agreed more or less universally that killing, cheating, lying, stealing and not keeping promises is wrong. These moral principles are the foundation for collaboration, friendships and business.

Societies that has not arrived at a consensus of a moral with do not k*ll, do not lie or cheat, do not steal and keep you promises moral and used empathy as a basis guidance in life and love (Do not unto others what you not...), have found it hard to establish conditions for stable collaborations for societies to thrive. Societies which did not arrive at such moral preconditions for collaborations would most likely not have survived for long.

Today societies that can further and refine the preconditions for collaboration will be most likely to succeed.

DO NOT WORRY PEOPLE, even as I am a THEIST, I still consider myself largely AMORAL (I wouldn't be in MTC if I wasn't).

You do confirm that prejudice that theists often are amoral people, while atheists often are the moral people. We do not accept things or moral instructions upon faith.

Question. Why do you think it is amoral to be in MTC?

On this thread, we set aside for the meantime the question on the existence of God. That part of the debate, if you wish to engage on that, can be done on the other threads.

 

What this thread is about is to settle whether the MORAL CODE that GOD (according to theists) gave man is still relevant today. So whether God exists or not, as far as this thread is concerned is IMMATERIAL. There is a MORAL CODE that theists believe God gave man. This moral code exists, though the details may vary from interpretation to interpretation of the various religious sects. But let us agree, this moral code, can be summarized as thus "LOVE GOD, LOVE ONE ANOTHER".

 

It is my contention that without this code, man would be lost. And given that we have the technology to end our species, we would self-destruct. Atheists hate to admit it, but even as they hate the idea that God exists, they still reference their own morals based on the standards set by this code. They do not adhere to it, but they want to know how far from the straight and narrow they have strayed.

 

Without the God-given moral code, an atheist would need to build from the ground-up his own moral code. What would this code be like? Let us see, hmmmm... something like, it is illegal to k*ll dogs for meat, but abortion is legal; prayer in schools is illegal, but gay marriages are legal (do these people even know who invented "marriage" and what it means?) -- just two examples of purely random man-made "moral" standards.

 

Alright, that's the opening statement, tell me what's your take.

I find the opening text to the thread to be arrogant by the theists and insulting to atheists.

What an arrogance to claim that only you have morals.

No atheists, or as most of us atheists are we do not take our morals from your scriptures, such as the bible or koran or from your religious traditions and interpretation. We, or many of us, find them utterly disgusting. We do not think that they are a precondition for moral conduct, but that they are a hindrance for moral conduct.

No we do not give any higher authority to any human construct of moral, just because the followers make reference to the authority of an imaginary supernatural author of books that we find disgusting.

What you call “MORAL CODE that GOD gave man”, does not differ in its authority from any other moral constructed by man. They are all human or cultural constructs. Because moral can only come from humans.

It is not so that without a scripture endorsing slavery, stoning of people, eye for an eye, women as inferior to men, genocide, original sin, etc, mankind would be lost without a moral to guide them.

As I see it human moral are derived from and closely related to human biology, human and societal discourse and experience. Human moral is not a thing given one time. It's constantly evolving. It is generally improving over time. Our moral today is wastely improved over brutal middle eastern bronze age moral such as those that we find in scriptures.

Moral is evolving and it should always be evolving. By referring to moral as god or scripture given, then you try to stop any future discussion and evolution. Human societies do not evolve by shutting down the conversation and critical debate. Our moral just as any other human or societal institution needs and thrives on an open discourse and our experiences.

I would be worried about UV.

I would not have my family sitting for longer periods with pupils wide open for UV radiation in any room with tinted glass.

What tints gives the maks UV protection?

I wanted to created a new topic called

"Secular schools in the Philippines"

Where people could recommend good secular schools to one another. However I did not have priviledge to create a new topic. :-(

Anyway:

I have a question about schools in the Philippines.

The oldest son of my sister in law will start high school this year.

They are planing to have him start in the High School department of Angeles University Foundation AUF.

They are asking if we will support them with the fees etc. I am in principle OK with that. I would actually really like to support that everyone in my family get good education.

But I just now discover that AUF is a Christian brain washing camp.

http://www.auf.edu.ph/modules.php?name=New...cle&sid=122

 They write:

"The move was essential in strengthening basic education, particularly in the fields of Mathematics, Science and Computer with Christian Formation as the core. "

and

"

The AUF Integrated School envisions to emerge as a center of excellence in Science, Mathematics and Computer Education in Central Luzon with Christian Formation as the core of the curriculum.

"

This is absurde. It's impossible to have science with Christian formation as its core!

"

They will:

NURTURE the ideals of genuine Christian values and traditional Filipino virtues;

"

As an atheist I DO NOT want to nurture Christian/religious values. I really want to support my family's education, but it have to be secular schools.

But I am just wondering if there is any good secular high schools in Angeles or near Angeles?

Or in the Philippines.

My guess is that most atheist will have a hard time finding appropriate schooling for their children.

So what secular or atheist preschools/schools/High Schools/Colleges/Vocational training to recommend and promote?

- Anders

Does teachers still use physical punishment here in the Philippines??????

1) Is it legal?

2) Will the police bring a case to court and will the court convict the criminal teacher?

3) Is it social accepted that adults who has children in their trusted custody transgress this trust and responsibility?

4) What is wrong with parents that accept such abuse from teachers?

5) How can the management of the school ever afford to have criminals as teachers?

Never. It'd be totally unacceptable.

To earn an academic degree is about credit, honor, credibility and trust.

You give credit and receive credit as credit is due. You EARN your degree with honor. That's the honor code of academics.

Once you have your academic honor intact, you will build a credible reputation for your self.

Based on this the trust in your is build. Trust is the starting point in all professional relationship.

If business people and professionals are not trustworthy in academics, then the trust breaks down and society disintegrates. You cannot conduct business without huge cost of monitoring and control. Most likely, when trust is not wide spread in society, you will only conduct business with your family, your clan, people in your class, on/from your island. You will not trust them and they will not trust you. Most likely they will collude in their little groups to cheat the others that they don't trust and they will in turn return that towards you.

Cheating in academics is showing that you are a person without honor and should not be trusted!

It starts in grade 1.