It is discouraging to me that after all these exchanges, you continue not to understand that "atheism" is not a moral code any more than theism is a moral code.
The difference is that I say good resides in man, and you say it resides in some other entity.
And there is not one moral code for theists any more than there is for atheists.
There is no way to move forward if this simple concept cannot be grasped.
Theists smuggle into their god-picture an imagined, or associated, package of injunctions which they think represent not only the good of Man, but the desires of the god-guy. Theists with all sorts of different orders from their deities have attempted to force them down the throats of other theists who intuit a different package of orders.
As I say, theists and atheists alike struggle to evolve a good way of living.
I like good, kind, decent theists, and don't like mean, vicious, base atheists. I have know both, and I've known the reverse case.
You actually seem to be saying that your rules are better than mine because there are ten of them, and they are so specific!
I'm glad people aren't allowed any longer, specifically, to stone their naughty children. I think humankind figured out that that god-rule wasn't good for it.
Good for humankind.
I won't be on again tonight, because I'm going to a meeting to organize a celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and to promote some specific actions in support of the struggle for religious freedom in Tibet. (I can tell you from experience that there will be as many atheists there as there will be theists, all working for religious freedom, and that this causes no problems.) |
