The God Delusion

[Loismustdie 0]

primitive cultures wouldn't be expected to be as morally evolved as advanced cultures. that has nothing to do with god. duh.japan is doing pretty well morally without your god, a lot better than the USA in fact. and in case you didn't know genocidal radical islamists worship the same god as you do.

I argue that it has everything to do with God. Primitive cultures wouldn't be expected to be as morally advanced- what? No way!! My point was that primitive would have stayed primitive- hell, it still does- without the introduction of God/morality, and that it needs to be introduced- it doesn't come naturally neccesarily. Do you really think that cannibalism,extreme self mutilation,animal sacrifice and human, is really about culture? Come on- it's about societies immersed in sin. Japan is doing well morally? Sure. Maybe. However, they still largely recognize a god or god's, so that would just prove my point.

[crowTrobot 2]

But Japan does have Gods, it is not an outright atheistic country.

well shinto sorta has "gods", but there is no central intervening deity responsible for morality in either shinto or buddhism, and the japanese certainly don't believe morality comes from the christian god.

Also how is Japan doing on its treatment of Chinesse and Korean people?

a lot better than the USA is treating muslims.

As far as I know no country has any real claim to moral superiority.

certainly not the USA.

I argue that it has everything to do with God. Primitive cultures wouldn't be expected to be as morally advanced- what? No way!! My point was that primitive would have stayed primitive- hell, it still does- without the introduction of God/morality, and that it needs to be introduced- it doesn't come naturally neccesarily. Do you really think that cannibalism,extreme self mutilation,animal sacrifice and human, is really about culture? Come on- it's about societies immersed in sin.

except most of the world transcended primitive culture without even knowing about the christian god. cultural/moral progression was obviously the result of developing technology, language, and intellecutalism leading to the spread of and understanding of the benefits of empathetic behavior. had nothing to do with the genocidal god of the bible.

[DerekTah 0]

a lot better than the USA is treating muslims.

Oh, we are taking poor homeless muslims and exploiting their needs for a PS3?If a man marries a woman here in america. Do we do blood test to make certain there is no middle-eastern desent in them at all.I'm not going to make a big arugment about who is treating the other better (I said no country had moral superiority, no need to pick and choose which countrys fail). Quite frankly I don't care who wins the "We only piss on them. We don't piss and **** on them" contest.You either treat others right or wrong, "a lot better" doesn't cut it for any country.

[crowTrobot 2]

Oh, we are taking poor homeless muslims and exploiting their needs for a PS3?

no just killing them

[Flack_attack 0]

Crow- just curious- what's your occupation?

[timwakefield 68]

As far as I know no country has any real claim to moral superiority.

Tibet does. Not that they'd claim it, but Tibetans are morally superior to the rest of the world.

[Loismustdie 0]

Crow- just curious- what's your occupation?

Ideology rapist.

no just killing them

You're joking with the Muslim stuff, right? Tell me you're joking.

well shinto sorta has "gods", but there is no central intervening deity responsible for morality in either shinto or buddhism, and the japanese certainly don't believe morality comes from the christian god.a lot better than the USA is treating muslims.certainly not the USA.except most of the world transcended primitive culture without even knowing about the christian god. cultural/moral progression was obviously the result of developing technology, language, and intellecutalism leading to the spread of and understanding of the benefits of empathetic behavior. had nothing to do with the genocidal god of the bible.

It had everything to do with belief in higher power, which was the drug of choice is irrelevant. Not to be obstinate, but you're nowhere close to correct. You don't have to go back very far to prove it, either.

[crowTrobot 2]

You're joking with the Muslim stuff, right? Tell me you're joking.

nope

It had everything to do with belief in higher power, which was the drug of choice is irrelevant. Not to be obstinate, but you're nowhere close to correct. You don't have to go back very far to prove it, either.

in most eastern religions morality is considered an inherent trait to be self-learned/discovered and strived for, not something we would be totally without unless a cognizant intervening god gave it to us.that's irrelevant anyway since if the christian god existed, according to the bible he wouldn't be passing his concepts of morality to us through promoting belief in other "flavor of choice" gods. all you are really arguing is that religious belief in general leads to morality, which is the same as saying morality is devoloping on its own through a stage of social advancement that religious belief is a part of. your argument has nothing to do with the christian god or the bible.

[brvheart 1,752]

My copy of The God Delusion has a solid silver jacket (no clouds) and a solid blue cover. I was disappointed.

[Loismustdie 0]

nope in most eastern religions morality is considered an inherent trait to be self-learned/discovered and strived for, not something we would be totally without unless a cognizant intervening god gave it to us.that's irrelevant anyway since if the christian god existed, according to the bible he wouldn't be passing his concepts of morality to us through promoting belief in other "flavor of choice" gods. all you are really arguing is that religious belief in general leads to morality, which is the same as saying morality is devoloping on its own through a stage of social advancement that religious belief is a part of. your argument has nothing to do with the christian god or the bible.

A degree of the message is still passed- the finer points are missed, but the larger points still get through. That doesn't take away from the fact that it's still God behind it. As far as the Muslim stuff, horsecrap. You buy into that and you're just ad bad as the extreme right.

[crowTrobot 2]

A degree of the message is still passed- the finer points are missed, but the larger points still get through. That doesn't take away from the fact that it's still God behind it.

or the easter bunny

[Loismustdie 0]

or the easter bunny

Can always count on you for an easter bunny reference. Good form my friend.

[crowTrobot 2]

Can always count on you for an easter bunny reference. Good form my friend.

point was you haven't shown any evidence that morality can come only from god. you haven't even really shown that primitive cultures unaware of god are necessarily immoral. In fact, traditions of self-mutilation aside, most primitive African tribes are a lot more empathetic and peace-loving than Christians and Muslims, and in a few cases their level of common sense morality is light years ahead of the genocidal "civilized" governments of the countries they happen to live in.

[Loismustdie 0]

point was you haven't shown any evidence that morality can come only from god. you haven't even really shown that primitive cultures unaware of god are necessarily immoral. In fact, traditions of self-mutilation aside, most primitive African tribes are a lot more empathetic and peace-loving than Christians and Muslims, and in a few cases their level of common sense morality is light years ahead of the genocidal "civilized" governments of the countries they happen to live in.

Sure. African tribes got it going on. You should go live there. Let me know how that goes. Just send up a smoke signal, and I will know it was you. Don't have sex, though- disease is crazy rampant, mostly because the men don't believe in protecting themsleves or there women. Depending on the tribe, you may need to drink blood, or wrap animal bones around your dong till it unfolds like a Crowtrobot necktie, and if you get really lucky someone who you "love" may contract aids and you can either A, pretend they don't have it or B, be forced to admit it and either banish them from the village or make them hide in a room, forced to sell gum to try and eat and feed the kids, who you(thankfully) never really have to take responsibility for. Meanwhile, you could, if you wanted, learn a good deal about animal sacrifice, or the correct way to slaughter thousands of your own. That should keep you busy.

[crowTrobot 2]

Sure. African tribes got it going on. You should go live there. Let me know how that goes. Just send up a smoke signal, and I will know it was you. Don't have sex, though- disease is crazy rampant, mostly because the men don't believe in protecting themsleves or there women. Depending on the tribe, you may need to drink blood, or wrap animal bones around your dong till it unfolds like a Crowtrobot necktie, and if you get really lucky someone who you "love" may contract aids and you can either A, pretend they don't have it or B, be forced to admit it and either banish them from the village or make them hide in a room, forced to sell gum to try and eat and feed the kids, who you(thankfully) never really have to take responsibility for. Meanwhile, you could, if you wanted, learn a good deal about animal sacrifice, or the correct way to slaughter thousands of your own.

none of that cultural tradition stuff is necessarily immoral, tribes don't protect themselves from disease because THEY DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER, not because they know and choose not to, and most primitive tribes wouldn't even know what aids is.

[Loismustdie 0]

none of that cultural tradition stuff is necessarily immoral, tribes don't protect themselves from disease because THEY DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER, not because they know and choose not to, and most primitive tribes wouldn't even know what aids is.

They don't know any better because they have rejected God, so he has rejected them. See how that works? Not to mention that many know better, they just don't care or respect themselves enough to take action.

[crowTrobot 2]

They don't know any better because they have rejected God, so he has rejected them. See how that works?

"primitive cultures aren't aware of modern methods of disease control because they rejected god"another classic for the LMD hall of fame.

[copernicus 0]

"primitive cultures aren't aware of modern methods of disease control because they rejected god"another classic for the LMD hall of fame.

Are there groups that have rejected all concepts of a personal god that are aware of modern methods of disease control? Your African tribe example only shows your bigotry with respect to other peoples' moral codes.Morals have absolutely no correlation with belief in a personal god. The most immoral acts in history have been performed in the name of a personal god.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Are there groups that have rejected all concepts of a personal god that are aware of modern methods of disease control?

I like to call them athiests.

[copernicus 0]

I like to call them athiests.

Excellent. Since atheists cannot be shown to be any less moral as a group than "those who have seen god", LMDs link of morals with god is disproven.

[checkymcfold 0]

i just bought this book, and after reading the intro/first chapter, my overwhelming impression is that this dawkins guy is pretty much clueless about philosophy and religion alike. i may not even make it all the way through this one. but once i get a better idea of what he's doing exactly, i'll write a more sustained "review" here.for now, i'll say, "dawkins is a hypocritical doucheclown who embarrasses agnostics like myself."

[Loismustdie 0]

i just bought this book, and after reading the intro/first chapter, my overwhelming impression is that this dawkins guy is pretty much clueless about philosophy and religion alike. i may not even make it all the way through this one. but once i get a better idea of what he's doing exactly, i'll write a more sustained "review" here.for now, i'll say, "dawkins is a hypocritical doucheclown who embarrasses agnostics like myself."

That's all I have been saying. Thanks, Checky.

[crowTrobot 2]

for now, i'll say, "dawkins is a hypocritical doucheclown who embarrasses agnostics like myself."

whatever you think of his views one thing he absolutely is not is hypocritical, so you are either misinterpreting him, or getting caught in a agnosticism/atheism terminology trap or or something.

[Flack_attack 0]

For Crow, True of False (according to dawkins and the God Delusion): Nothing can be considered true, unless it is scientifically proven, will be scientifically proven, or has the potential to be scientifically proven by empirical scientific evidence.

[Flack_attack 0]

Bump so crow sees.