It's not shallow. It's a logical observation on the nature of morality. Without an objective source of morality everything boils down to stark utilitarianism. Democracy posturing as morality, rule by numbers rather than what is right.
"Killing innocent humans is wrong."
Islam disagrees. One billion of them in fact. What now? How can that be dealt with? Is your belief system even equipped to deal with that?
That's the sort of nonsense which makes religious people look retarded, you cannot point to a room full of happy law abiding and highly moral people and decry them for mere beliefs.
You're being no less retarded than lefties who decry a room of Whites being immoral for being White.
Also fuck Islam, the only thing they're good for is how they treat their women.
How is it retarded? Weight of numbers is, at best, amoral and often immoral. That's basically a fact, unless you're prepared to advocate for a pure democracy of mob rule. For morality to exist at all it by necessity must put structures on the whims of the populace.
Nevermind equating law abiding with highly moral. Any government with universal suffrage is not a moral one, and thus strict obeisance to their laws is again at best amoral.
In basically every pre-Christian society murder is only a big deal in as much as it destabilizes society. Killing an enemy is no big deal. Killing kin is big deal. Killing neighbor is bad but can be fixed with monetary compensation to their kin to avoid further conflict. It's fine to say you are moral without religion but it's good to recognize where those ideas of morality came from.
A target would suffice.
This is what any tattoo means frankly.
Ehh, some tattoos are fine. Ones used to re-color in scars or medical skin pigment ailments, in example.
How...satanic.
I'm not offended, you go on and end your bloodline and keep to Gomorrah.
moloch must feed or the sun goes out
Perfect.
These will be the Nazi tattoo equivalents in a decade.
One on the right looks like one of (((them)))
Because this isn't a political conflict. It's a moral one. That's why atheists will never really be allies, for example.
Because this is, and always has been, about good and evil.
Am atheist, don't agree with abortion.
Granted I hate most atheists, and most religious people for that matter. There's good in both groups and retards in both as well.
No one said that you would agree with abortion. Merely that someone without a religion is out of place in a religious war.
Because leftism isn't about politics. And arguably it never was.
It comes across as shallow to suggest that without faith in god, you cannot have morals or something.
Killing innocent humans is wrong, sperm+egg=human, so the only logical conclusion is that abortion is wrong as well.
You don't have to be religious to have a moral center, just like how religious people (and atheists) often lack one anyways.
It's not shallow. It's a logical observation on the nature of morality. Without an objective source of morality everything boils down to stark utilitarianism. Democracy posturing as morality, rule by numbers rather than what is right.
"Killing innocent humans is wrong."
Islam disagrees. One billion of them in fact. What now? How can that be dealt with? Is your belief system even equipped to deal with that?
That's the sort of nonsense which makes religious people look retarded, you cannot point to a room full of happy law abiding and highly moral people and decry them for mere beliefs.
You're being no less retarded than lefties who decry a room of Whites being immoral for being White.
Also fuck Islam, the only thing they're good for is how they treat their women.
How is it retarded? Weight of numbers is, at best, amoral and often immoral. That's basically a fact, unless you're prepared to advocate for a pure democracy of mob rule. For morality to exist at all it by necessity must put structures on the whims of the populace.
Nevermind equating law abiding with highly moral. Any government with universal suffrage is not a moral one, and thus strict obeisance to their laws is again at best amoral.
In basically every pre-Christian society murder is only a big deal in as much as it destabilizes society. Killing an enemy is no big deal. Killing kin is big deal. Killing neighbor is bad but can be fixed with monetary compensation to their kin to avoid further conflict. It's fine to say you are moral without religion but it's good to recognize where those ideas of morality came from.
I think I can agree with that. Although I am sure some other place came up with similar morals without christianity.
Granted they probably got obliterated by the savage hordes.
After all the posturing and propagandizing, "Safe and rare" has turned into "medium-rare, baby-eating time!" real fast, eh?