Read on Twitter
<thread 
>
Atheism has no morality
>Atheism has no morality
Morality i.e good/bad (or right/wrong ; justice/injustice) are defined by God. By definition what good is what God says it is, & vice versa.
Obedience to God's commandments is what is defined as good and disobedience to his commands is defined as bad.
The logic is that simple.
Obedience to God's commandments is what is defined as good and disobedience to his commands is defined as bad.
The logic is that simple.
Morality, just like heaven is a religious concept.
It's like an atheist trying to prove angels exist but God doesn't. Angels are creations of God after all.
More intelligent atheists like Friedrich Nietzsche realized this.
Source: "The Twilight of Idols" (1889) Nietzsche
It's like an atheist trying to prove angels exist but God doesn't. Angels are creations of God after all.
More intelligent atheists like Friedrich Nietzsche realized this.
Source: "The Twilight of Idols" (1889) Nietzsche
In fact even the learned atheist scholars admit that creating objective morality is impossible for actual human.
In other words we can conclude that atheism has no objective morality.
Source: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199259755.001.0001/acprof-9780199259755
In other words we can conclude that atheism has no objective morality.
Source: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0199259755.001.0001/acprof-9780199259755
What atheism can only do is create subjective morality.
P.S. subjective = opinion, whereas objective = fact
(there is no 3rd one)
"Red is the best color" is subjective
"2+2=4" is objective
(incase atheists have trouble understanding it)
P.S. subjective = opinion, whereas objective = fact
(there is no 3rd one)
"Red is the best color" is subjective
"2+2=4" is objective
(incase atheists have trouble understanding it)
Of course many laymen atheists will deny this and attempt to claim they have morality.
The simple question to refute atheism's claim of having a moral foundation is just to ask:
~ How does atheism logically determine what is good and what is bad?
The simple question to refute atheism's claim of having a moral foundation is just to ask:
~ How does atheism logically determine what is good and what is bad?
Most reddit new-atheists cannot answer it
But the possible answers they could give would be something like:
1a - Maximize Happiness, Pleasure, and/or Wellbeing
1b - The Harm Principle (remove/minimize harm)
2 - Consent
3 - Evolution (aka what animals do, benefits survival)
But the possible answers they could give would be something like:
1a - Maximize Happiness, Pleasure, and/or Wellbeing
1b - The Harm Principle (remove/minimize harm)
2 - Consent
3 - Evolution (aka what animals do, benefits survival)
#1 is just John Stewart Mill's "harm principle"
It can be summarized as: "Do what ever you want as long as you don't harm anyone"
Source: "On Liberty" (1859) John Stuart Mill
It can be summarized as: "Do what ever you want as long as you don't harm anyone"
Source: "On Liberty" (1859) John Stuart Mill
This logic contradicts atheism, as mountains of scientific studies have shown atheism is harmful to human health and society.
This large meta-analysis shows how atheism harms people's well being, mental health, and results in higher crime rates.
Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140197111001138
This large meta-analysis shows how atheism harms people's well being, mental health, and results in higher crime rates.
Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140197111001138
This atheist logic of promoting hedonism also permits things like rape, bestiality, and child molestation.
Atheist philosopher David Benatar explains those who promote "sexual liberation" open the doors to rape as a "human right".
Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40441324
Atheist philosopher David Benatar explains those who promote "sexual liberation" open the doors to rape as a "human right".
Source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40441324
Although internet reddit-type new-atheists won't admit it, actual academic atheist PhD philosophers like Benetar, Singer, Gule etc... will state that this is what subjective attempts at a secular liberal atheist moral framework logically lead to. https://twitter.com/TenBillionIQ/status/1352507155212087298
Even atheists who pretend to be philosophers like Lawrence Krauss (sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein's friend, & a leader of atheist activism) was forced to admit that brother-sister incest is permissible in atheism.
Source:
a)
b) https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/
Source:
a)
b) https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2019/07/12/former-asu-physicist-lawrence-krauss-got-250-k-jeffrey-epstein/1718659001/
Scientific studies on the topic of atheism and morality have found that even *atheist participants* judge things like incest, bestiality, and cannibalism as representative of atheism.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092302
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0092302
#2 also contradicts atheism.
The logical end conclusion of basing morality on consent is anti-natalism, summarized as: "life is the ultimate evil since nobody consents to being born".
So here atheism will cause the extinction of the human race.
Source: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296422.001.0001/acprof-9780199296422
The logical end conclusion of basing morality on consent is anti-natalism, summarized as: "life is the ultimate evil since nobody consents to being born".
So here atheism will cause the extinction of the human race.
Source: https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199296422.001.0001/acprof-9780199296422
Of course even if we do not goto this extreme conclusion, atheism also contradicts informed consent.
After all no atheist informs religious people that atheism causes health problems, depression, and promotes higher suicide rates.
Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10943-009-9248-8
After all no atheist informs religious people that atheism causes health problems, depression, and promotes higher suicide rates.
Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10943-009-9248-8
#3 ironically also contradicts atheism.
Secularism (aka atheism) results in population decline and a civilization's eventual extinction. Atheist societies do not and cannot survive.
Sources:
a) https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/pvwpy/
b) https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(09)00289-7
c) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2153599X.2012.667948
Secularism (aka atheism) results in population decline and a civilization's eventual extinction. Atheist societies do not and cannot survive.
Sources:
a) https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/pvwpy/
b) https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(09)00289-7
c) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2153599X.2012.667948
And of course we should not even need to explain why the behavior of animals should not be the basis for morality.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/dolphins-rapists-sea-8335059.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/dolphins-rapists-sea-8335059.html
Atheism clearly has no morals.
Even their poor attempts to claim they have objective morals are easily refuted not just by religious people, but by their own atheist academics.
If any atheist thinks other wise feel free to prove me wrong. (I doubt you can tho lol)
</thread>
Even their poor attempts to claim they have objective morals are easily refuted not just by religious people, but by their own atheist academics.
If any atheist thinks other wise feel free to prove me wrong. (I doubt you can tho lol)
</thread
>
