Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
To be clear this question was prompted by SFT insisting objective morality is (only) possible through his religious beliefs. I recognise cultural attitudes vary wildly and over time, which is precisely why religious claims for objective morality are specious nonsense. Religious morals have fared no better than purely secular morals, and generally date quite badly.
Either SFT thinks it's ok to rape nine year old children, or he doesn't, either way his claim for Islamic objective morality evaporates, and what's more he knows this or would have tried to answer the question.
"don't forget the baby rapers in the Bible."
I am not, I find all such pernicious behaviours equally repulsive.
Don't forget this fact. There are still 18 states in the United States that have no minimum age floor. This means it is perfectly legal to marry a new born babe!
Check it out on this Wikipedia page: Age of marriage in the United States
The very first sentence: Unlike most Western countries, 18 of the U.S. states do not have a legal minimum age of marriage.
rmfr
delete
The issue is that Muhammad was no more moral than the worst laws today, and is less moral than the best laws.
Precisely, so either objective morality can justify the rape of children, in which case what use is it to us. Or Islamic morality is as subjective as any other, in which case we have a right when the likes of SFT come here sneering down his nose at secular morality, to point out the repugnant flaws contained within Islamic doctrine,m and the behaviour of its worst adherents.
If it contains objective morals why can't Muslims even defend the most venerated Muslim of all, the prophet Muhammad? Let alone all agree on what that objective morality should be, whether suicide bombing of non believers for instance is perfectly moral or an abhorrent act of indiscriminate murder.
The sheer cowardice of SFT coming here to sententiously sneer at the morals of atheists as being subjective, is manifest in the fact he refuses to even attempt to address the obvious contradiction in his claim.
Such arrogance is hardly new of course, or remotely surprising from someone who compared himself to the atheists he's too scared to answer on here, as a lion to sheep.
So I ask again SFT, is it ever moral for a man in his 50's to rape a nine year old child. Or perhaps you don't consider sex with a 9 year old as rape even?
@Searching for truth doesn't even seem to be a scholar of his own opinion.
He voices it with an intransigent confidence though, ironically. Quick to deride, and sneer at others as somehow less erudite, I mean no one's going to forget that lion and sheep crack in a hurry, are they.
@ Sheldon Re: "I mean no one's going too forget that lion and sheep crack are they."
I won't. How could I?
rmfr
To be fair to @Searching for truth, he may be no more immoral than the average Muslim.
Which I suppose means no morality at all...
rmfr
Tempus fugit SFT?
Since thesequestion have sonpetrified SFT that he's tucked tail and run away, I'll throw them open to all adherents of the Islamic religion that share SFT's claim their beliefs offer objective morality.
Is it ever moral for a 50+ year old man, to rape a nine year old child?
What is the penalty in Islam for apostasy, and what is it for being gay and having a physical relationship with another consenting adult of the same gender?
We're still waiting SFT? You turned up in another thread and gave another sententuous sermon, but are too cowardly to face difficult questions that challenge your religious preconceptions.
Like ROYISM you insisted your religious beliefs give you objective morality, well then show some integrity and put your money where your mouth is...for once.
Is it ever moral for a 50+ year old man, to rape a nine year old child?
Is it ever moral to assume a nine year old child can consent to sex, let alone with an adult in their 50's
I suspect that the reason @Searching for truth does not answer is because he knows it can only worsen his reputation.
It's his beliefs , and particularly the absurd claim his religious beliefs possess objective morality that will be destroyed, and he knows it, as did ROYISM, and neither one of them has the courage or integrity to acknowledge this fact.
His reputation hit rock bottom once it became clear he was going to sneeringly pretend he was looking for common ground, whilst ignoring objective direct questions about Islam and its paedophile prophet.
.
Or as I have said, he already knows the answers and is too fearful to state them because it will make his religious speeches to be the pretentious rantings of a madman.
rmfr
The person this thread was made for is really bad at debating lol. To summerize:
He posted a meme saying that he is above this and therefore will NOT respond... then he started responding because cause the "sheep" somehow got under this "lion's" skin and proceeded to answer questions by asking questions *Face-Palm*
People like SFT just keep posting nonsense and for some reason the nice atheists on the site continue conversations with them. Some of these get as many as 500 posts. Sheldon is a MONSTER at just hanging in there, repeating himself a hundred times, and trying to wear down the ignorance. Sapporo will certainly hang in there as well and so will
David K now that I think about it. Hey? Whats wrong with me..... I just have no patience for dipshit assertions.
Nothing wrong with the direct approach at all. I like to mix it up myself. I usually find theists expose their own arguments if you give them a little rope. It's pretty much impossible for people like SFT and ROYISM to deliver their hypocrisy about objective morality when they either have to defend the rape of a nine year child as contextual, or condemn their prophet as an amoral paedophile.
ROYISM lost it, the veneer of friendly pious theists fell away sharpish after only a tiny bit of pressure applied in the right place, SFT knows he has nowhere to go, so runs away. They all have one thing in common, they believe something they have no objective evidence for, and nobody I don't care who they are likes to be told their worldview is based on nothing.
I wouldn't care for it either, so I can sympathise to a certain extent, but then they start preaching at me and I lose that sympathy. I simply find it nauseating to have someone sneer at my morals as subjective, then refuse to condemn the rape of a child because it would expose the lie that their religion offers objective morality.
I do Cognostic because dipshits always dig holes so deep it is hilarious watching them try to scramble out. Give them enough rope to hang themselves, but always keep the other end firmly tied to the gallows.
I find it entertaining to answer them...lips curling into a wide sadistic grin...
*******
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
It's edifying to see you treat your beliefs like a joke.
Says it all really.
I see nothing amusing in venerating a paedophile though, and it's a joke to claim that represents morality at all, let alone objective morality.
Run along now cowardly lion, nothing for you here apparently. The chance to show integrity has gone.
@Sheldon Re: "Run along now cowardly lion, nothing for you here apparently."
Dog-gonnit, Sheldon. My pal Leo saw that and got all upset. You have any idea how difficult it is to console that over-sensitive furry lug? Took all night and two gallons of mint chocolate chip ice cream before I was finally able to convince him you did not mean that as an insult toward him. I had to tell him over and over that we all know he has way more courage than our Hulkster friend. Finally got him calmed down and in bed by dawn. (And I never even got so much as a spoonful of the ice cream.)
Sorry but lambs don't concern themselves with the plight of cowardly lions....
(Wink)
@sft
You are a coward, to scare to answer Sheldon's questions.
********
Attachments
Attach Image/Video?:
See, a fraidy cat.
rmfr
Searching for truth
You need to look in the mirror, your conduct is shameful as a man and practicing Muslim.
Why would anyone mind you?
You have no integrity, and nothing tangible to offer but gifs with punchlines that only serve to underscore the fact your beliefs and veneration for a paedophile are indefensible.
Like your fictional deity I find it impossible to "mind" what isn't there.
Tacitly defending a paedophile is all you've acheived here. So much for the religion of peace.
delete
Pages