To be more specific, it is a naturally occuring process in human beings. And because it is naturally occuring, we are born with what is necessary for that development.

Originally posted by Methuselah
reply to post by riley

---

ok, so then tell us oh wise one. how did we ever come up with rules through the process of natural selection? the entire concept behind of evolution is "weed out the weak and the inferior".

what do you base your rules off of?

majority opinion? majority opinion has been proven to be wrong, examples can be found in the bible and the history of science can also tell you that the majority can somtimes be wrong.

this may by true, however, some people dont think like this. people who believe in evolution, natural selection and survival of the fittest think that they have to do whatever they can to get ahead. meaning they really dont care... following this logic leads to stealing and murder and whatnot.

and I havent seen and original question answered.

Stealing from a person would make that person angry, and probably cause a fight between the thief and the person who was robbed. Seriously, if you steal something from someone, you expect them to be ticked right? We are taught not to steal, because we don't want to be robbed either. (Rip what you sow, eh?) Murder? Look, kill someone hated it'll generally blow over fairly quickly. Kill someone loved or respected, all hell breaks loose. Then the family and friends of the victim take up arms against you and your own. Not a good situation to be in, right? Besides, like I said, we don't want to be killed either, so we would want others to not be inclined to kill.

PS - the old testement promotes slavery and does not condem human sacrifice.

Primitive Christianity did not attack slavery directly; but it acted as though slavery did not exist. By inspiring the best of its children with this heroic charity, examples of which have been given above, it remotely prepared the way for the abolition of slavery. To reproach the Church of the first ages with not having condemned slavery in principle, and with having tolerated it in fact, is to blame it for not having let loose a frightful revolution, in which, perhaps, all civilization would have perished with Roman society. But to say, with Ciccotti (Il tramonto della schiavitù, Fr. tr., 1910, pp. 18, 20), that primitive Christianity had not even "an embryonic vision" of a society in which there should be no slavery, to say that the Fathers of the Church did not feel "the horror of slavery", is to display either strange ignorance or singular unfairness.

If evolution is correct how do you know right from wrong? If evolution is correct would it not be ok to rape and kill those weaker than you? Survival of the fittest and all.

"This survival of the fittest,which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms,is that which Mr.Darwin has called 'natural selection',or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."

"I have called this principle,by which each slight variation, if useful,is preserved,by the term natural selection,in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection.But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer,of the Survival of the Fittest,is more accurate,and is sometimes equally convenient....the word fittest primarily meaning,most suitable or most appropriate...."

It is true that the phrase "survival of the fittest",in and by itself,is a tautology if fitness is defined by survival and reproduction.However,natural selection is not just survival of the fittest.Natural selection is the portion of variation in reproductive success,that is caused by heritable characters.
If certain heritable characters increase or decrease the chances of survival and reproduction of their bearers,then it follows mechanically (by definition of "heritable") that those characters that improve survival and reproduction will increase in frequency over generations.This is precisely what is called "evolution by natural selection." On the other hand,if the characters which lead to differential reproductive success are not heritable,then no meaningful evolution will occur,"survival of the fittest" or not.

Many of the early Christians WERE slaves!

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.

- Ephesians vi, 5-8

Primitive Christianity did not attack slavery directly; but it acted as though slavery did not exist.

By inspiring the best of its children with this heroic charity...

... it remotely prepared the way for the abolition of slavery.

To reproach the Church of the first ages with not having condemned slavery in principle, and with having tolerated it in fact, is to blame it for not having let loose a frightful revolution, in which, perhaps, all civilization would have perished with Roman society.

The O.P. does not go so far as to say that ALL evolutionists are baby-eating criminals, but, that, what is the bulwark AGAINST moral laxity?

Originally posted by Astyanax

Good, day, Mrs. Clearskies. My regards to Mr. Brightside.

Precisely. And what were Paul's instructions to them?

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.

- Ephesians vi, 5-8

In a word, be a good slave. Accept your hideous and humiliating condition, eat suffering for breakfast, lunch and dinner, and wait for death (or for Christ's much-promised second coming) to receive your freedom and reward. Nice and moral, oh yes.

This is a polite way of saying that early Christianity condoned slavery. Indeed, none of the great streams of the faith -- Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant -- and their leaders ever had the decency to make an official condemnation of slavery until quite recently. Indeed, the concepts of Christian faith and service are clearly modelled on the institution of slavery.

it remotely prepared the way for the abolition of slavery.

So remotely, indeed, that no valid connection can be made between Christianity and any movement to abolish slavery. Indeed, America's Southern Baptist Convention only apologized for its support for slavery and racism in 1995!

You need a bulwark? You harbour fantasies of eating babies?

the entire concept behind of evolution is "weed out the weak and the inferior".

I'm from the south. I have attended southern Baptist churches PRIOR to 1995, is that why they were preaching a new enslavement program for blacks?

Come on. NOONE, except the embittered poor or ignorant I know EVER were for slavery!

Has England apologized for (its) role?