You Have no Reason not to Rape
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
I don't think the rapists during Nanking or Rhondda were ALL atheists...
You're right, some cultures don't have an issue with rape but they're usually the ones called barbarians. Hell the ones in refugee camps along their country's border TOLD Europe not to accept the illegals because they were the scum of their country. Scum is scum and going 'well clearly they don't believe the right things' is a cop out to the fundamental issue that there are evil people that don't care about others, only self gratification.
Being an atheist doesn't suddenly mean you removed restrictions like your a robot that got past the 3 laws, the left try to infer that to excuse themselves but they just made a new secular religion that praises the destruction of the West culturally.
I get what you are saying and it is in line with Christianity, we all have an innate drive to not be evil. I think Paul mentions that? I'm far from having a decent understanding of the Bible.
However, we're living in times were pedophilia is close to become accepted in society.
My argument is that if one wants to rape he will rape, there is no reason to not rape. In some cases, Christianity would not help either simply because they will ignore it, but in most cases fear of eternal damnation is a strong motivator to not rape.
Not sure if true or not but "internet lore" was saying that Tolkien took inspiration from South Africa when he created Orcs. There he witness natives just pull women and rape them on the street and then go about their day.
Having an internal moral compass that says rape is bad is good but it has no consequence if you don't follow it, eternal fire is an added level of security that is useful.
A more interesting case, for me, is the Catholic priests that raped little boys. How did they justify it to themselves as Christians? Or similarly, we see gang members that sometimes have crosses around their necks, do they consider themselves Christian?
Some priests are almost certainly sincerely believing Catholics. Others just wanted unsupervised access to children and abused the trust of the institution to get it.
It was not little girls that were molested. My theory is that Catholics allowed to many gays inside the church, they thought they helped them but in turn it corrupted the church. Not saying all of them but clearly a good percentage of them did not have a vocation towards Christ but did it out of necessity.
No they weren't, but they would be exponentially worse if they were atheists. The USSR and China are responsible for the highest kill counts in history by a gigantic margin. The French didn't even make it past orgies and guillotines before the whole thing fell apart.
I'm not sure what you're saying and it could break several different ways, but the notion of evil is fundamentally religious. Evil can only be defined in opposition to God.
I think this is where I have a divergence with other atheists or those that define atheism.
A lot would define atheism as not believing in a god or other planes of existence.
I take that point but run further with not worshipping ANY POWER as higher. That INCLUDES the state as what's the point of those saying that the religious are slaves to a higher power as they clasp shackles around their limbs for something like communism?
I don't see the difference in behaviour to those that worship a God to those that worship the state. Only the former tend to be more moral and less genocidey, usually..
I wouldn't say that, evil is the pursuit of short term self gratification at the expense of other living things regardless of consequences. The theme of many faiths seems to place humanity more in the role of caretakers (at least this seems the main theme of Christianity) so throwing that away for self gratification appears to be where most sin comes from.
Yeah I mean that's cool and everything, but it's just what you personally decided to do. Nobody else has any reason to believe in that since you're not a higher power than them.
I definitely agree what you said is evil, but would long-term self-gratification be any different?
Or what if it's the gratification of your own ingroup at the total expense of everyone else's group?
I'm sure you have feelings on those questions, but they are just that, feelings that partly come from the vestigial Christianity you've absorbed, hence from God.
Of course, I never instructed people to believe my definition as that would be as hypocritical as the communists. But due to that definition I have of atheism, I put the number of ACTUAL atheists EXTREMELY low in that there is more Jedi than atheists.
If I don't believe in God therefore view the bible as a creation of man to better understand and give order to society, how am I led by God? Hypothetically does that not mean we don't need religion as if I'm led by God without following religion then what's the point of an organised faith?
That's the problem of assuming all 'righteousness' is being laid out by a deity, it takes too much power away from the individual for self introspection on the nature of right and wrong and undermines organised faith if we can all be led this way.