Colorado Massacre a Result of Attacking Christianity?

reply to post by Misoir

I feel like most humans on the planet are moral relativists, I personally dont believe there is an objective morality and to suggest that there is would suggest something created it. As far as values.....people always bring that up but never really say what they mean. What values do you consider important?

Originally posted by windword
And your moral compass points where?

This will be a cyclical argument if I propose as to where my moral compass points. I suspect (although am not putting any words into your mouth) that you believe in moral relativism. If I am wrong - great - if not, the reason for arguing it is baseless.

It's unfair to classify any group, atheist or religious folk as morally wrong. Altruism and overall kindness exists in all walks of life.

I never said it did not. My point had absolutely nothing to do with niggardly people. My uncle is an irreligious Atheist and he would do just about anything for anyone. Even without that personal relation I know even abstractly that not all moral relativists are bad people.

If your reaction as quoted above however was not in regards to the interpretation of my post as insinuating moral relativists are stingy, then that shows your basic views of things. That "altruism and overall kindness" are elevated to the most fundamental of moral virtues then you and I have parted ways long, long ago.

reply to post by acmpnsfal


I do believe there are objective values, cultural relative values, and individually relative values. Objective are the values found in the texts of all faiths whether they be monotheistic, polytheistic, pantheistic, or animistic, and regardless of their place of origin. These are values related down to man from the divine. Then we have the cultural values which are the interpretations of the divine's message to men and/or those developed for specific purposes to fit the environment or basic needs of the tribe. Cultural values I see as developing organically among closely linked biological groups, but simultaneously others are added, dropped, or altered to fit the specific needs of geographically separated peoples. And finally individual relative values are those specific things which man adjusts his will towards; for example, I object to consumption of alcohol, this is a personal value that is independent from that of my "tribe" and from the divine.

reply to post by Misoir


Could you give me an example of an Objective value found in all religious texts? When I asked what values you think are important I was not asking for definitions. What I meant was, what values do you consider important for a healthy society to function. You seem to be under the impression that all values come from religious texts but also say cultural values, can be added, dropped, or altered to fit the specific needs. So wouldnt it be the case that the culture is creating the values and then the religion changes to stay current? After reading your definitions though, I have a question. Do you think its possible for an athiest, like myself, to have values without belief in the divine?

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by DocHolidaze

 

Eh, not outlaw everything. I think we could improve on guns. Like make everyone get a gun license and have to pass a psychological exam to get the license to ensure guns are only given to stable individuals.

have u ever heard the term criminally insane, pass all the laws u want, criminals will get guns and use them to hurt people, if they don't have a gun they will hurt people in other ways, there isn't an answer to the problem, people will murder, people will die, it has always been this way and always will, Ur attempts to find a solution to death is and always will be a DEAD END

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by Misoir

 

Could you give me an example of an Objective value found in all religious texts?

No unjustified murder, no raping, "do unto others as thou would havest done unto him", charitable acts, justice for the innocent, and so on. Of course they vary by each tradition such as how it is interpreted and applied but these are all basic tenets found in 90%+ of faiths/religions.

So wouldnt it be the case that the culture is creating the values and then the religion changes to stay current?

It very well could be, but that would generally require a disbelief in the divine, or at least a disbelief in the divine being involved in human affairs. Whether this holds any relation to the material quoted above for you I cannot tell, but it does seem interesting to relay nonetheless. An ancient site discovered in Turkey, Gobekli Tepe, dates back to the Neolithic period around 10,000BCE. What makes this so incredible is that contrary to popular academic thought which stated agriculture allowed for nomads/hunter/gatherers to settle, grew into cities, then erected complex spiritual systems to form the shared morals/ethics needed to maintain a stable city, Gobekli Tepe was a spiritual sanctuary erected by hunter/gatherers which then caused them to remain in proximity to their holy site, causing agriculture to arise and then the cities. Basically, spiritual beliefs are what begun the civilizing of man.

After reading your definitions though, I have a question. Do you think its possible for an athiest, like myself, to have values without belief in the divine?

Well everyone has values, regardless of their theological belief. You have a moral value so long as you think it okay or not okay to kill an innocent person. Therefore I do believe Atheists/irreligious have moral values, but they all become individually relative values because at that point nothing is thus superior to the human, at least in metaphysical terms, thus nothing beyond the self can develop values objectively. All values are instead interpreted as originating from the individual who then develops it into religions and/or cultural beliefs. A shared system of values can then only be forced upon individuals by other individuals in this context, rather than originating from a source transcending humanity or coming about through the organic development of humans as a collective entity.

reply to post by DocHolidaze


All those things are facts. People will murder and people will die. However you should not make it easy for someone to commit a crime just because crime exists. . If my suggestion was in place and the guy who committed the massacre was evaluated chances are he would not have been given a gun licence. And would definitely not have access to the gun he used to carry out his plan. I mean giving a gun to someone who is mentally unstable is just asking for trouble imo. That's just like giving a nuclear bomb to a terrorist. Its a really bad idea.

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by DocHolidaze

 

All those things are facts. People will murder and people will die. However you should not make it easy for someone to commit a crime just because crime exists. . If my suggestion was in place and the guy who committed the massacre was evaluated chances are he would not have been given a gun licence. And would definitely not have access to the gun he used to carry out his plan. I mean giving a gun to someone who is mentally unstable is just asking for trouble imo. That's just like giving a nuclear bomb to a terrorist. Its a really bad idea.

ok so a murderer gets denied guns, whats the next logical move for someone that wants a gun, black market, and now he has a gun with no documentation, and your law just made it harder for anybody to connect the suspect with the weapon, now he gets off in court and does it all over again , yeah, your law just saved lives

reply to post by Misoir

No unjustified murder, no raping, "do unto others as thou would havest done unto him", charitable acts, justice for the innocent, and so on. Of course they vary by each tradition such as how it is interpreted and applied but these are all basic tenets found in 90%+ of faiths/religions.

I figured those are the things you were referring to. Those things are universal to the human experience and most people would feel that they were wrong irregardless of belief in the divine. I mean our brains are wired for compassion, empathy, and to protect those we identify as like us. Anyone could observe a murder, see the pain in the person being killed or by those who are left behind and see that its not ok. Anyone could experience being stolen from and realize they don't want to do it to other people. Justice for the innocent? Eh, more like justice for those who follow the same belief system. I could go on but im sure you can see where im going with this. Ancient philosophers came up with a lot of the same ideas (some better) people take away from religions like Christianity.

It very well could be, but that would generally require a disbelief in the divine, or at least a disbelief in the divine being involved in human affairs. Whether this holds any relation to the material quoted above for you I cannot tell, but it does seem interesting to relay nonetheless. An ancient site discovered in Turkey, Gobekli Tepe, dates back to the Neolithic period around 10,000BCE. What makes this so incredible is that contrary to popular academic thought which stated agriculture allowed for nomads/hunter/gatherers to settle, grew into cities, then erected complex spiritual systems to form the shared morals/ethics needed to maintain a stable city, Gobekli Tepe was a spiritual sanctuary erected by hunter/gatherers which then caused them to remain in proximity to their holy site, causing agriculture to arise and then the cities. Basically, spiritual beliefs are what begun the civilizing of man.

Thats interesting I will have to look into it. But I will say I dont find it all that astounding. I mean cultures from around that period have been found with burial grounds, suggesting they believed in life after death and honoring their ancestors. But some of them also worshiped sticks and other random things found in nature. I do feel like the Gobekli probably started to settle in that area because of its resources and got along with one another before they erected the spiritual system. I think its too big of a coincidence that they just happened to be somewhere advantageous for the development of agriculture.

Atheists/irreligious have moral values, but they all become individually relative values because at that point nothing is thus superior to the human, at least in metaphysical terms, thus nothing beyond the self can develop values objectively. All values are instead interpreted as originating from the individual who then develops it into religions and/or cultural beliefs. A shared system of values can then only be forced upon individuals by other individuals in this context, rather than originating from a source transcending humanity or coming about through the organic development of humans as a collective entity.

This is exactly what I believe to be the case in general with humanity but credit was given to outside forces that I do not believe exist.

reply to post by DocHolidaze

Thats your opinion, I seriously doubt any of the people that have gone on killing sprees would have been able to obtain guns on the black market. They are usually sheltered individuals with no street experience or smarts whatsoever. Would also probably lack the social skills to make those connections. Doubt a mass murderer would get off, lol. They are always caught or commit suicide. Plus, its a proven fact that if someone has to work too hard to commit a crime, they wont. Not to say he would not have done anything, but he probably would not have used a gun. Also, not all states currently make you register your guns, that needs to change as well. So there are plenty of unregistered guns floating around out there right now. Glad you brought it up.

reply to post by acmpnsfal


I would like to clarify one thing though. My beliefs do not align with "revealed religion" as in, I do not believe a divine being actually spoke to man. That is the major difference between "nature religions" and "revealed religions"; examples of the former being European Paganism, American Indian Spirituality, Hinduism, while examples of the latter being Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. When I say these things were given to man by the divine, what that means is it was provided to us internally, it is only something we can reflect upon within ourselves. When culture X develops different spiritual and moral beliefs this stems from both their biological makeup as a unique set of the human stock and then further defined by their geographic/topographic existence and development.

I believe each race, and even the sub-groupings in each race, have their own unique spirit. The physical appearance is only the material display of the spirit. Biology is the scientific study of this but on a solely material level. From this arises our particular experience with the divine and how it relates to our existence. Needless to say I am a Germanic Neopagan (Asatru) and do not like the thought of a single God which is personal and reigns supreme over such a diverse world.

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by DocHolidaze

 

Thats your opinion, I seriously doubt any of the people that have gone on killing sprees would have been able to obtain guns on the black market. They are usually sheltered individuals with no street experience or smarts whatsoever. Would also probably lack the social skills to make those connections. Doubt a mass murderer would get off, lol. They are always caught or commit suicide. Plus, its a proven fact that if someone has to work too hard to commit a crime, they wont. Not to say he would not have done anything, be he probably would not have used a gun. Also, not all states currently make you register your guns, that needs to change as well. So there are plenty of unregistered guns floating around out there right now. Glad you brought it up.

edit on 21-7-2012 by acmpnsfal because: (no reason given)

you must know all these mass murders personally, or are you just repeating what you hear on mainstream media, truth is u know nothing about any of these guys, so u cant back up ur claims of there social skills and connections, and by the way black market doesn't care if ur a nerd or the leader of a gang money is money and if u have money you can buy off the black market, im glad ur reducing ur arguments to broad generalizations now, it shows your character. and by the way my previous scenario didn't only reefer to mass murders, it applied to any criminal that has been involved in a shooting. you do want to save all victims of gun violence? not just the once portrayed in the media right? oh that's right u just want to make a thread about this subject because its in the news now, it seems there is a reason for media tricks, its for the people easily swayed like you.

reply to post by DocHolidaze

Nope not repeating what i've heard in the media, I've actually taken a class where we dissected people like him. Anywho, restricting accessibility to guns based on psychological assessments would probably decrease some random gun violence. Except when it comes to gangs, most of them already obtain their guns illegally so they cant be traced. But it would weed out the trigger happy people of our population which would probably cause police less headaches and prevent a good number senseless murders.

reply to post by acmpnsfal

Nope not repeating what i've heard in the media, I've actually taken a class where we dissected people like him.

you have no idea what hes like unless you go by what u heard in the media, just like any curriculum that studies mass murders they only speculate and make a broad generalization on what these people are like, when u can tell me you personally were a close acquaintance of a mass murder , i will start believing that you are an authority in this subject, till that day, u are just a dude that took a class, and has an opinion on a law that will in no way stop mass murders from acting out there crimes

reply to post by Misoir


It's late, or early here, and I can't sleep, so I got up and checked my ATS. When I read your reply to me, I was trying to shake the rocks out of my head, because I couldn't understand WHAT you were trying to say to me. You're right, it is circular.

But after reading your following post to the OP, I think I understand you better, I can see where we actually do part ways, on the morality issue. It isn't about relativism or pragmatism, it's about the divine source.

If the issue of ultimate morality come from a divine source, and I'm not saying that it doesn't, the Biblical God and the story of our relationship with this God is flawed from the get go.

We are introduced to fully developed humans who are immediately expelled from the divine for falling for trick, out of naivete. We have no history of a loving childhood or a relationship in a loving family setting, which we would emulate in adolescence and pass on to our children in adulthood. The Biblical God provides no role model.

So we start out with a generational curse, separated from the divine and at the mercy of the rest of god's creation, fallen angels. After a collective trauma, of the flood and all the previous rape, we are given a list of rules to follow, if we want to reclaim our relationship with divinity. These laws are flawed from the get go.

Then this supposedly loving God sends his son to be murdered by an angry mob, to cleanse our "sins" if only we believe the story. We are promised the 2nd destruction of the world, by the return of a vengeful God, who is to separate the good people from the bad, who are doomed.

This is not the bases of true pragmatic morality, in my opinion. It is the basis of mental illness. There's nothing divine about the God of the Bible, in my opinion.

We need both...

God & Guns

Oh yeah. The lifting of Gun Restrictions.

I didnt read anything anywhere that said I couldnt protect myself or those around me. Matter of fact, it promotes it, even in the last days.


btw, your op did come off as taking a dump on both guns and christianity/God.

"as nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need for masters"

I do agree with this statement very much. Virtuous doesn't have to mean religious. But it is very important to be virtuous. For some people, religion helps them to be virtuous. Unfortunately most don't "get the real message" and instead listen to their corrupt and vicious religious leaders and so it becomes a bad thing and they do bad things In the name of their god. Anyway, I'm rambling here... I don't think the shooting happened because of an attack on Christianity. But I do believe some of the things he said, or quoted from someone else who said it or whatever... It's not the devil that made the killer do it... It's the luciferian intelligence agencies that MK ULTRA people into doing it...

reply to post by LDragonFire

Christians are limiting the rights of gays and trying to limit the rights of Muslims

That line is hilarious. Wtf do you think Muslims do to gays? huh?

reply to post by DocHolidaze


Love that movie. Love that PART of that movie. Love your avatar. Love your screen name. Just wanted to tell you that while I have a chance... You know, before we all die.... FROM GUNS!!!! Oh and I agree with your argument.

Remember people... If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns. And even if they dont. ID still rather have a gun when some maniac comes at me with a knife or whatever... What am I supposed to do, carry a knife everywhere and learn to become a skilled knife fighter? Sure, it would be kinda cool, but I shouldn't HAVE to do that... No, I do not think guns should be outlawed. If that theater didn't have that stupid policy, someone coukdve shot this guy. Even with body armor they might've got lucky or slowed him down enough for a split second for someone to tackle him. If I was there and saw someone else at least standing up to this guy, that would give me the courage to tackle him from the side while he was paying attention to the guy shooting at him!

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

Christians are limiting the rights of gays and trying to limit the rights of Muslims

That line is hilarious. Wtf do you think Muslims do to gays? huh?

Your gonna justify what one group does to another? Does it make it right? Do you you know what Muslims do to women? So should Christianity have that right also?