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.
I didn't say anything about some sort of tyranny of the masses.
I'm saying a moral argument can be done by anyone, religious or not.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that some things are good, and some things are bad, inherently.
Also for 'law abiding' I'm mostly meaning the big laws, murder, that sorta deal. I don't think someone is immoral for cutting an AR's barrel to 11 inches.
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.
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.
I didn't say anything about some sort of tyranny of the masses.
I'm saying a moral argument can be done by anyone, religious or not.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that some things are good, and some things are bad, inherently.
Also for 'law abiding' I'm mostly meaning the big laws, murder, that sorta deal. I don't think someone is immoral for cutting an AR's barrel to 11 inches.
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.