Atheism

God, country, family. All of these are necessary components to create and sustain a successful and thriving society. Take away one, and the whole thing crumbles.

Atheism plays a large role in the destruction of western civilization. It is one of the root causes for the degeneracy and overall moral decline we see today.

It all stems from the fact that atheism is incompatible with moral absolutism, which makes it possible to morally rationalize any action (i.e. moral relativism), as can be seen with the LGBTQ movement. This acronym is constantly evolving (currently at LGBTQQIP2SAA if I'm not mistaken), and I believe it's just a matter of time before pedophilia and bestiality are integrated as well (in-before muh slippery slope).

I expect some people to challenge the notion that atheism is incompatible with moral absolutism. I've had this debate before, and they usually resort to: "It's in our biology. A product of evolution that is innate in all humans. Empathy." The problem with this argument is that it begets the question: Whose "biology" are we talking about? People seem to have different concepts of what is wrong and what isn't. Who is right? What society? Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution.

Why can't atheists understand this?

Fight the good fight and keep the faith.

Might makes right. Ask the dead Christians in the USSR their thoughts on the matter

>Christians would save a drowning man
>Therefore god exists!

What if the drowning man was a black or a Jew

Right, because Christian countries in Latin America and Africa are just so pure and free of degeneracy. Christfags are embarrassing.

Inb4 hat joke

>Migrants drown in the med.
>crist/pol/: good

Atheist should say "I'm going to save him to prove I'm better than Christians."

>a man is drowning
good
thank you Mr Poseidon

I remember this guy. He was a total mess by the end of the thread the last time he posted this same thing. A stammering trainwreck who had a complete meltdown and engaged capslock.

That's not what the picture is about and you know that.
Likewise
>Might makes right.
Plenty of atheists have died by the hands of Islam. Plenty of muslims have died by the hand of christianity, and vice versa. Might makes right is unintelligible.

>tfw when MSD
>tfw you actually hear about people drowning in still water
People are naturally buoyant. If you drown in still water, you deserve it.

All the Christians I've met would just say it's God's will the man is drowning and then start praying.

>atheists are necessarily psychopaths

yeah ok bud

>I remember this guy. He was a total mess by the end of the thread the last time he posted this same thing. A stammering trainwreck who had a complete meltdown and engaged capslock.
This is the first time I've made this thread.

Correction

>Atheist jumps in to save him
>Christian prays for god to save him

Lying is bad.

>muh I can't wrap my head around multidimensional concepts
>HAHA Its not a guy who can love me like my father never did!
>hahahaha Ur teh baby cuz u want a daddy like I never had
>i'm not alone
>I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT
>KEK BELIEVING IN A SKYFAIRY THAT LOVE YOU HAHAHAHAH IDONT NEEDLOVE!!!!

>atheism=social darwinism

Oh please, you're going to need better bait than that.

That's not what I said at all.

You just looked at the picture and didn't bother reading the OP, didn't you?

It's okay to project your feelings onto others but at least do it coherently.

>Right, because Christian countries in Latin America and Africa are just so pure and free of degeneracy. Christfags are embarrassing.
Do they have the other necessary components? Are they nationalists? Strong families?

OP, your photo is based very heavily on speculation. All you can know for sure about an atheist is that he doesn't believe in any kind of god. Regarding what you wrote...

>God, country, family. All of these are necessary

I mostly agree.

>Atheism plays a large role in the destruction of western civilization

Here you fail to distinguish between a genuine earnest lack of belief in god(s) and simply branding yourself something because it's trendy. In all honest, most atheists probably just are atheists because it's trendy.

>atheism is incompatible with moral absolutism

Right and wrong is determined by a culture not a religion. Additionally, it's a stretch to say that a lack of belief in god means more than just a lack of belief in god.

>Lying is bad.
Feel free to look in the archive.
Anecdotal evidence.

For people nowadays to understand what you are trying to say, they need to read meditate and understand the works of Thomas aquianus and tie it with a comprehensive knowledge of history.
But most people can't and won't do that because they can't perform the mental gymnastics.
The pride that envelopes the atheist prevents him from understanding the doctrine of the fall and everything that follows.
But we can hope that some will be converted

Atheists are the niggers of religion. They chimp out against anything related to God or out of nowhere. They are only a destructive group that hinders progress and a threat to humanity.

if you religious fags werent all so appallingly shit at arguing your case then maybe there wouldn't be so many atheists

>just ignore how retarded our religion is because you need it to survive!!!

lol go fuck yourself

How do I not believe in God? Every time I wake up I feel his divine presence guiding me and I can't escape him! Help atheists!

Try waking up inside.

You are proof that religious people are less intelligent than the rest of us.

the image said that

aquinas is simply a catholic shill who is cited by philosophical plebs who have no idea what they are talking about

ffs there are religious philosophers, christian ones alive right now that would be better to cite than a man who is literally centuries out of date at this stage

even that mong William Lane Craig would be a better souce than Aquinas, at least WLC lived in the last century and tailors his arguments so that they dont clash with modern scientific discoveries

>morally rationalize any action

impossible to do so OBJECTIVELY anyway

>Why can't atheists understand this?

why cant you understand atheists are ahead of you?

all of those "questions" raised die quickly when you see that all morality=subjective

Drink fluoridated water and eat shit food.

>that user who only responds based on the image instead of the text
this isn't facebook or redit

>OP, your photo is based very heavily on speculation. All you can know for sure about an atheist is that he doesn't believe in any kind of god. Regarding what you wrote...
The picture demonstrates how it's irrational for the atheist to risk is own life in order to save the drowning person. Of course there are atheists who will still save the person, but it's irrational in a godless world because your own survival is far more important than somebody else's.
>Here you fail to distinguish between a genuine earnest lack of belief in god(s) and simply branding yourself something because it's trendy.
If someone says they are an atheist, I will take their word for it.
>In all honest, most atheists probably just are atheists because it's trendy.
I agree to some extent. I believe we all subconsciously know that God exist, it's just that this truth is suppressed by propaganda and sinful behaviour (not walking with God). Still, they are calling themselves atheists so that's how I will refer to them.
>Right and wrong is determined by a culture not a religion
Did you even read the OP? Can pedophilia be both right and wrong? No, it can't. That's a contradiction, and contradictions are illogical. It's either right or wrong, or neither. You need an absolute moral authority (i.e. an objective judge) to determine what's right and wrong because otherwise it just boils down to opinion and is essentially meaningless.
>Additionally, it's a stretch to say that a lack of belief in god means more than just a lack of belief in god.
Is it? Is it a stretch to say that a belief in God means more than just a belief in God? No, it isn't.

so?

i will respond to op's image, text, both, or neither as i wish

>trying to b8 atheists on a christian board
all my wut?

Aren't you Pagans? Anyway.
>Whose "biology" are we talking about?
Altruism starts with close family and ends at the tribe. Sky fairies and what you are implying is synthetic altruism that assisted the rise of feudalism. Muh Lord, muh vassals, muh son and heir to muh throne and all that shiat.

>I agree to some extent. I believe we all subconsciously know that God exist, it's just that this truth is suppressed by propaganda and sinful behaviour (not walking with God). Still, they are calling themselves atheists so that's how I will refer to them.

You can't be Swedish, Ahmed.

Imigrants are sub-human therefore they do not count.

Good rebuttal.
So you're a psychopath if you value your own survival over somebody else's? I don't think that's the definition of psychopathy.

i can only go by op's image, not whatever one you are talking about

Atheist: Oh shit a dude is drowning, better save him
Christian: Oh shit a dude is drowning, better save him

>Altruism starts with close family and ends at the tribe. Sky fairies and what you are implying is synthetic altruism that assisted the rise of feudalism. Muh Lord, muh vassals, muh son and heir to muh throne and all that shiat.
Didn't answer the question. Whose biology is the standard? Since that's what you atheists so often use as a form of argument. "It's a biologically ingrained hing". Whose biology determines what's right and wrong? Like I said previously, two contradictory claims can't both the true, since that's illogical.

nigga please

>show book with cover
>what's the main idea of dante's inferno
>bridges right lol

Comprehend the text first before you can fully understand his/her post

It's all a social construct you mong

reread my post and then deal with

1. The image "demonstrates" absolutely nothing. It's a non-scientific, hypothetical scenario.

2. Your problem.

3. Paedophilia is a-okay in nigger tier places like the Mid East and Africa, and definitely not okay in civilized areas, so no, it can't be both right and wrong IN THE SAME PLACE. And in regards to your absolute moral authority spiel. What would a protestant country know about that? And what would a mortal man such as the pope know about it. The bible addresses many legal issues, though not everything. When there are issues that it fails to address, then to whom or to what do we turn?

4. Again, if all I tell you is that I am an atheist, then try to prove anything beyond me not believing in a god. It's simply impossible.

>You can't be Swedish, Ahmed.
Why not? Because I believe in God?
The image did not say that atheists are psychopaths. You jumped to that conclusion based on a faulty definition of psychopathy.

A good person would jump in regardless of religion, this image is pushing an agenda and nothing else.

op:
>only MY super hero (who is real) has figured out PERFECT morality! it is perfect because it says it is!

A succesful society also needs to be educated. And everyone knows that an educated society is a godless society. You don't need much of a background to actually understand the 2000 years old ethics for dummies aka the bible, but you do need to have a good grasp of science in order to understand complex topics such as evolution

Looks like we got ourselves a rare breed of based Swede. Remember this guy Sup Forums because soon they will be no more.
And OP stop arguing with random faggots on some fucking meme magic imageboard . Just do your thing and keep up good work.

/thread

>deal with it
What's the fucking point doing so
shitpost somewhere else

>The image did not say that atheists are psychopaths. You jumped to that conclusion based on a faulty definition of psychopathy.

ambiguity fallacy

letting someone die based on judging their "genes" unworthy is psychopathism

>You jumped to that conclusion

no, words have meanings, i am aware of this, whereas you dont like this particular meaning and have fancifully invented your own in your head that no one knows about, you choose to try to shoot the messenger

so please skip the red herrings and ad-hoc dictionary-surgery, its counterproductive

only one person shit posting here

if you dont like it, stop doing it

>The image "demonstrates" absolutely nothing. It's a non-scientific, hypothetical scenario.
It's philosophical. Are you going to argue that philosophy has no authority? It's just fiction?
>Your problem.
Apparently it's seem to be a problem for you, since you got so hung up on it.
>Paedophilia is a-okay in nigger tier places like the Mid East and Africa, and definitely not okay in civilized areas
Why not? Because you said so? We're not talking about laws here, we're talking about morality.
> it can't be both right and wrong IN THE SAME PLACE.
So something can be morally right if I'm in a different geographical location? I think you are referring to norms and laws, not morality. Something can't be both morally right and wrong, that's contradictory, and consequently illogical.
>What would a protestant country know about that? And what would a mortal man such as the pope know about it. The bible addresses many legal issues, though not everything. When there are issues that it fails to address, then to whom or to what do we turn?
You fail to understand that there's still a basis for absolute morality when it comes to theism because of the absolute moral authority (i.e. God). Whether or not there are conflicting ideas about what the correct morals are is irrelevant. Atheism has no basis whatsoever.

>Christian
>helping
I thought God helps those who help themselves?

If the man does not save himself it would be an abomination action unto the lord and stuff if other christians helped him

Post a better OP image and you won't get so much shite

Uhh, no.

You obviously didn't understand the OP. Theism has a basis for absolute morality due to the absolute moral authority (i.e. God). Atheism doesn't. I never said that biblical morals are the correct ones, that's impossible to know. I believe they are however. That's called faith.

>Not to mention that it's irrational and quite frankly intellectually dishonest to assume that there is an ultimate standard of right and wrong that supersedes mere fanciful "ideas" about what is right and wrong at a given time in our ethical evolution.

>Let's assume there is an almighty being whos existence cannot neither be confirmed nor ruled out, who dictates standards of right and wrong. I know it's right because the Bible says so.

lel

In a way you have a point, though, the lower-IQ proles will destroy themselves without things like religion to keep them in line.

They're just too fucking stupid to make good decisions or behave themselves, it's the same reason that liberal "elite" policies end up not working despite being well meaning. The makers of the policies literally cannot think like the idiots they're trying to help.

For instance,

Ideal:
>It would be good to legalize marijuana. I've used it responsibly, it should work fine.
Reality:
>Tons of idiots sitting around getting stoned all day and doing nothing with their lives.

Ideal:
>We should try to take care of everyone with welfare. I know if I was poor, I would be happy for the help and would try to be employed again as soon as possible.
Reality:
>Time to sit at home and pump out kids

This is why population-controlling shit like religion is needed.

>philosophy

>authority

yeah ok bud

to say nothing of the fallacy of many questions

but this:
>Why not? Because you said so? We're not talking about laws here, we're talking about morality.

was spot-on

>Something can't be both morally right and wrong

morality is subjective
specific and slightly (to greatly) different to ever single person

>You fail to understand that there's still a basis for absolute morality

nope, morality, from whatever source, is only as "high" or as "enlightened" as each given mind (angel or demon or man) chooses to weigh it, or not

>Theism has a basis for absolute morality due to the absolute moral authority (i.e. God). Atheism doesn't.

so what makes it absolute or "better" in anyway?

Craziness is now objectively relative nowadays
People believe the gay shit is crazy, now it's acceptable.
If that is what the Darwinist believe, then let it be.

Christianity is basically based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. You know the typical consensus of "give to the poor" and etc,

>And OP stop arguing with random faggots on some fucking meme magic imageboard . Just do your thing and keep up good work.
There are still people on this board who aren't too far gone, and I'd like to reach out and help them. Thanks for the advice though.

Post a better OP image and you won't get so much shite
Yeah, will have to do next time.

p.s.
instead: YOU obviously didnt grasp the full scope and depth of what i posted

1. It's not even philosophical. It has no basis at all for its claims.

2. Define hung up.

3. Why? I don't know. I can't delve into the peabrain of an Arab and figure out why he behaves the way he does. And it's not okay in civilized areas, because laws, which are often a reflection of cultural beliefs in an area prohibit it. In the United States, freedom is very important, when I rape someone, I am violating their freedom to choose not to have intercourse with me.

4. Correct. I'm referring to exactly what I said I was referring to. Something cannot be both morally right and wrong in the same place. However, depending upon what culture your in, certain actions, for example Mayan Human sacrifice could be outright encouraged because they are perceived IN THAT AREA, as being good, wheres we know that those things are wrong.

5. Just answer the questions.

>Tells others they can't understand certain concepts
>After posting an image that generalizes two extremely large groups
Get back to prepping the bull, Svedjir.

>Craziness is now objectively relative nowadays

that is a logical and physical (physics) impossibility

the only thing objective about it is that it is subjective

when you realize that morality (no what the source, bar none) is entirely subjective, all of those issues/questions instantly evaporate as moot (no pun)

That is honestly a really bad argument.
It's more like:
Asshole Atheist: Lel natural selection *tips fedora*
Nice Atheist: I should help that person because I hold morals that are not dependent on a superior authority judging my every action
Asshole Christian: God works in mysterious ways XDDD
Nice Christian: I should help that person because Deus Vult

lol

>you have to be a Christian to jump in and save someone from drowning

Are you cucks really this deluded?

Christcucks literally need the looming threat of eternal damnation to just not be assholes.

we're pretending OP isnt trolling

>that is a logical and physical (physics) impossibility
>STUDY OF ENERGY IS RELATED TO A PHILOSOPICAL PERSPECTIVE
NIGGA DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING

>the only thing objective about it is that it is subjective
>objectively relative
Same shit (in a way, don't act as that picky perfectionist) different words

>atheists can never be selfless
False. Altruism is not a trait exclusive to Christianity.

>someone has his own world-view and its different then mine so i don't like it
/thread

Different person here. The imagine shows nothing because it's literally just fiction, not a philosophical demonstration of the immorality of atheists.

The atheist's reaction in the image is written so that he's purely selfish and self motivated, and as if atheists are so mechanical that they think a human being is justified because of Darwinism or some shit. It's a strawman. No one actually thinks like that, it's just easier to attack; writing a fictional scenario where an atheist is immoral is a poor argument that all atheists are immoral.

>>STUDY OF ENERGY IS RELATED TO A PHILOSOPICAL PERSPECTIVE

if you dont see how they necessarily relate, you are an oxygen thief

you said "objective" and i showed you how, with what basis, that cannot be

>NIGGA DO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING

yes, it went over your head

These "atheists trolling other atheists by pretending to not be atheists" threads are a little old.

funny, thats what OP said, using MANY more words, 1st, with more than a little snobbery to boot

Well it goes in a pair with the
>all Christians are cucked because the pope is a cuck

>muh moral absolutism
Sorry to burst your little bubble, but most forms of moral absolutism are a dead end.
Look at Muslims for example. They force their women to dress like trashbags, refuse to eat pork for no logical reason and cut part of their dicks off because such was the custom of some retarded Arab tribe 1400 years ago.
Deriving morals from religious scripture is a recipe for disaster and a good way to ensure that society goes absolutely nowhere.

>, but ALL forms of moral absolutism are a dead end.


ftfy

>Why can't atheists understand this?

Oh I understand it. It's just that you can't trust people to be good on their own. they need the fear of god to do good.

>Christian
>God had a plan for him. I bet he was a sinner anyways.
>Continues eating black dick

This is what actually happens in reality

Atheist: I am going to jump in to help that person, because if I were in that position, I would want help too.

Christian: I am going to help him because God watches and I don't want to burn forever.

Atheists are selfless. Christians act out of fear.

I'm an atheist, but I don't tell people in real life and I adhere to Christian moral principles.

Is that good enough for you guys?

i just dont understand what the hold up is

im waiting for anyone to prove some objective morality

but for some reason everyone who claims to have it never does

Man is drowning
>christian
>"He's made in God's image. He needs help"
>Atheist
>"He needs help"

for who?

some yes, some no, some cant/dont care

Facts are absolute, and if you hold specific values like the right to life (among other natural rights), then logic determines right and wrong (i.e. does this action infringe upon another person's rights)
Moral relativism is destructive, but all it really says is that if someone has fundamentally different values, then different actions can be considered moral. The US in particular is founded upon the idea that we all have rights that are inherent to us, and the government's purpose is to protect those rights. If we all agree on that, then I don't see how atheism can be destructive.
you seem to have this idea that people can't have principles without belief in a god

What? If anything I'd think that the man must be saved since death would be the end of all things

>for YOU

the person reading.

That even means you, I didn't ask for what the broad opinion of Sup Forums would be, I know Sup Forums isn't one person you autistic fucktard.

As a christian myself, my mindset doesn't spring to the fact that he is made in God's image, but that he is a superior white male, so that's why I save him. God made blacks because they are slaves, slaves don't deserve saving.

Why though? You put yourself at risk for someone objectively worthless.
I bet you are circumcised too, you fucking cuck.