It really doesn't matter to me, but I don't believe he is an atheist. He talks way too much about God for someone who absolutely doesn't believe. I also question whether he is an atheist from his lyrics. I have never met a true atheist, but those who truly don't believe would not make an such an issue of God as Ed often does. Based on what I know and have seen of Ed, I would say he is an agnostic. Again, it is my opinion and his religious beliefs don't faze me on bit. I love Pearl Jam and Eddie's music, regardless of his religious beliefs.
I like Elton John's music (yes I admitted it here), and I don't care what his sexuality is. It's all about the music!
It really doesn't matter to me, but I don't believe he is an atheist. He talks way too much about God for someone who absolutely doesn't believe. I also question whether he is an atheist from his lyrics. I have never met a true atheist, but those who truly don't believe would not make an such an issue of God as Ed often does. Based on what I know and have seen of Ed, I would say he is an agnostic.
Agnostic believes in a god but not in religion. I'm amazed that people can't believe when Ed says "I don't believe in god" and take it for truth, even when it comes from his own mouth multiple times. What more do you need?
What would he gain from saying he doesn't believe in god? I bet more of his listeners believe in a god of some kind, rather than don't.
They can't seem to accept it for what it is. Perhaps it hurts to believe someone you look up too doesn't share your belief and the songs you take as spouting perhaps religious leanings that compliment your own belief, are maybe not meant that way at all. I don't know. I'm facinated by the denial that happens.
I am an athiest, comepletey an athiest. It took years of study of the many religions of the world and many great works of philosophy to come to the realization that I don't believe in any religion or god. I'm not confused, I'm not undecided..I don't believe in a God of any kind.
But, I still use the term "Good God" all the time, I also say, "Thank God" and "God Damn it" and many other terms reflecting what some might take as a belief in a higher being. But honestly, it's out of habit and for lack of a better exclamation. I will say something touches my very soul, but it's because people will understand what that means not because I believe I have a soul to go to heaven or hell. It doesn't make me less of an athiest or suddenly an agnostic, just makes me uncreative in my speaking.
There are no rules for athiests to follow except we don't believe in gods or religion. But, morals don't come from religion. Morals come from an understanding of what's right and what's wrong, you can learn that without religion. I hold myself to the same tenents, I don't lie, I don't steal, I treat others as I would like to be treated, I don't commit adultry, I don't kill .It means I take reposibility for my own actions.
Totally agree with you SurfLife. It can be hard sometimes to express myself in the English language without making a reference to a god I don't think exists. I find myself using the expression "god forbid" at my job as a nurse all the time, just to communicate that I really, really don't want xyz bad thing to happen, but if it does, here's what we'll do, etc. It's something that people understand. But I'm trying to figure out a better way to say that, because I think it misleading to suggest that there is some whitebeard living in the clouds who has control over what is happening down here...
And in terms of morals - I can't help feeling like people would be behave with more respect and courtesy if the responsibility to do so was all on them, if we all just accepted that this life now is all there is, our only chance to do good for each other...didn't mean to get involved in this stuff on a band message board but there it it. Eddie announced it to a packed garden and I raised my fist in the air.
I'm sure the basic moral outline for Athiests and Religious folk is pretty much the same.
While I agree that killing is wrong, why is it wrong to atheists? Under atheism there is no god. We are all just atoms and molecules and nothing more. One atheist says killing is wrong. Another atheist says killing is okay. Who is to say either is right? Killing is a case of one set of molecules killing another set of molecules, just like a lion killing a zebra. It is survival of the fittest.
Under religion, there is a creator who has provided the moral law. No moral law has been provided under a world created by atoms. In fact, it doesn't need one. Atheists can create one, but they cannot defend it against one who disagrees.
While I agree that killing is wrong, why is it wrong to atheists? Under atheism there is no god. We are all just atoms and molecules and nothing more. One atheist says killing is wrong. Another atheist says killing is okay. Who is to say either is right? Killing is a case of one set of molecules killing another set of molecules, just like a lion killing a zebra. It is survival of the fittest.
Under religion, there is a creator who has provided the moral law. No moral law has been provided under a world created by atoms. In fact, it doesn't need one. Atheists can create one, but they cannot defend it against one who disagrees.
So why don't lions, dogs, whatever, kill each other all the time? Do they believe in god?
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
My two friends would still be alive and working in the World Trade Center right now, if it weren't for religion playing such a major part in the destruction caused on 9/11.
You fail to understand that even these fuckers aren't doing things in the name of religion. the islam faith doesn't condone what they did -- they did it for their own personal ideals, twisting around the religion at its very core, thinking they were doing it for 'Allah.' You won't find many religions that preach violence.......people that do practice it are extremists.
2003 Mansfield III 2004 Boston I 2006 Boston I 2008 Bonnaroo, Hartford, Mansfield I 2010 Hartford 2013 Worcester I, Worcester II, Hartford 2016 Bonnaroo, Boston I, Boston II 2018 Boston I, Boston II 2021 Sea.Hear.Now 2022 Camden 2024 Boston I, Boston II
I think a lot of people say that they believe in God because it's the easy thing to do. I respect people who question everything in front of them and seek the truth. I just think that people should seek the truth for themselves and never stop questioning a thing... I grew up Catholic, but I'm in a better place right now because I've questioned and sought answers.
I don't think there is anything wrong with wanting answers.
Hope that makes sense and didn't offend.
I could only speak for myself but believing in God isn't always easy. I do question a lot of things but I still believe but I guess that's having faith.
These cuts are leaving creases. Trace the scars to fit the pieces, to tell the story, you don't need to say a word.
Actually, this isn't quite true. An agnostic concedes that there may or may not be a God, but that there's really no way of knowing. Based on many of Ed's lyrics, I would assume this is what Ed believes.
I'm amazed that people can't believe when Ed says "I don't believe in god" and take it for truth, even when it comes from his own mouth multiple times. What more do you need?
Because other words have come from his mouth, at others times, that would seem to contradict that. Another thing is, people's beliefs and perceptions in this area are subject to change all the time -- so it's silly to say, "Well, on Aug 5, 1993, Ed said he didn't believe in God, so that must be what he believes now."
People want to bring up the latest MSG comment as firm proof of Ed's beliefs, but those of us who were there realize the context of the comment, and that it was kind of done in jest. So definitive proof it ain't.
My overall point is that there is no way of knowing what Ed truly believes on this subject. You could say I'm agnostic when it comes to the subject of Ed's atheism.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
yes there are. i dont recall ever believing in God with any conviction. i remember being agnostic. then at 11 i came to the conclusion it was all bullshit and i became an atheist. i have NEVER doubted God's nonexistence and i have never wavered. though i do think jesus was a real man.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
thank you. i know that story. i guess maybe i was just being too flippant. though i was more thinking lukin is a straight out story. whereas others of his require more depth of thought.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
While I agree that killing is wrong, why is it wrong to atheists? Under atheism there is no god. We are all just atoms and molecules and nothing more. One atheist says killing is wrong. Another atheist says killing is okay. Who is to say either is right? Killing is a case of one set of molecules killing another set of molecules, just like a lion killing a zebra. It is survival of the fittest.
Under religion, there is a creator who has provided the moral law. No moral law has been provided under a world created by atoms. In fact, it doesn't need one. Atheists can create one, but they cannot defend it against one who disagrees.
It falls under doing what is right and what is wrong, just because I don't believe there is a heaven or a hell doesn't mean I should end the life and hope someone else would have same respect for me. WAY more people are killed over religon than over lack of, just look at middle east, or Nazi history.
Because other words have come from his mouth, at others times, that would seem to contradict that. Another thing is, people's beliefs and perceptions in this area are subject to change all the time -- so it's silly to say, "Well, on Aug 5, 1993, Ed said he didn't believe in God, so that must be what he believes now."
People want to bring up the latest MSG comment as firm proof of Ed's beliefs, but those of us who were there realize the context of the comment, and that it was kind of done in jest. So definitive proof it ain't.
My overall point is that there is no way of knowing what Ed truly believes on this subject. You could say I'm agnostic when it comes to the subject of Ed's atheism.
While I'm not here to prove or disprove anything on Ed's beliefs, I am only pointing out what Ed has stated on multiple occasions. He says it very clearly without any side story. You can only go on what he has actually stated, not what we might interpret his other less distinct refrences might mean.
By the way, I was at MSG. I don't think it was taken out of context. He seemed amused by thanking God as if that was the joke and then he stated he didn't believe in God. Why wouldn't you take it at face value?
I concede I mistyped what an agnostic is. I had deist in mind as I thinking of how to respond.
While I'm not here to prove or disprove anything on Ed's beliefs, I am only pointing out what Ed has stated on multiple occasions. He says it very clearly without any side story. You can only go on what he has actually stated, not what we might interpret his other less distinct refrences might mean.
By the way, I was at MSG. I don't think it was taken out of context. He seemed amused by thanking God as if that was the joke and then he stated he didn't believe in God. Why wouldn't you take it at face value?
As I've mentioned elsewhere on this thread, I don't think Ed believes in the Judeo-Christian conception of God. And I think that's what he meant with the statement he referenced.
But I would not be surprised if he believed in some sort of more general conception of "god" or "something bigger" or "a higher power."
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
While I agree that killing is wrong, why is it wrong to atheists? Under atheism there is no god. We are all just atoms and molecules and nothing more. One atheist says killing is wrong. Another atheist says killing is okay. Who is to say either is right? Killing is a case of one set of molecules killing another set of molecules, just like a lion killing a zebra. It is survival of the fittest.
Under religion, there is a creator who has provided the moral law. No moral law has been provided under a world created by atoms. In fact, it doesn't need one. Atheists can create one, but they cannot defend it against one who disagrees.
Sure, but it was man that created the story of religion and god and therefore man who created these laws of morality.
These same morals are pretty well established within every culture through the law, through social norms learned in school, through good parenting, and by all other means that we learn as we grow.
Without religion these same basic moral guidelines would still exist.
These morals are defended by the society that adheres to them, which just happens to be how it works now.
Those with religion and those without break these laws and there is usually consequence.
Sure, but it was man that created the story of religion and god and therefore man who created these laws of morality.
These same morals are pretty well established within every culture through the law, through social norms learned in school, through good parenting, and by all other means that we learn as we grow.
Without religion these same basic moral guidelines would still exist.
These morals are defended by the society that adheres to them, which just happens to be how it works now.
Those with religion and those without break these laws and there is usually consequence.
Not to speak for him, but I think what he meant was this:
How does man instinctively know what is right and what is wrong? People in Sri Lanka, Alaska and Paris all have a similar sense of morality, no matter what their cultural or religious backgrounds. There seems to be a common consciousness that binds us, that tells us "It's wrong to kill" or "it feels good to give a dollar to a homeless man."
Why? Who decided what's right and what's wrong in the first place? Can there be standards of morality without a God to set that standard?
It's a philosophical question worth pondering, I think.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
Not to speak for him, but I think what he meant was this:
How does man instinctively know what is right and what is wrong? People in Sri Lanka, Alaska and Paris all have a similar sense of morality, no matter what their cultural or religious backgrounds. There seems to be a common consciousness that binds us, that tells us "It's wrong to kill" or "it feels good to give a dollar to a homeless man."
Why? Who decided what's right and what's wrong in the first place? Can there be standards of morality without a God to set that standard?
It's a philosophical question worth pondering, I think.
I think it's something of an evolutionary thing, which is what I was getting at with my question of why wild animals don't just kill each other. It's wrong to kill because that unbalances the population, it's good to give a dollar to a homeless man because that keeps the harmony in the population, etc. Obviously, that's taking it down to a very basic level.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Not to speak for him, but I think what he meant was this:
How does man instinctively know what is right and what is wrong? People in Sri Lanka, Alaska and Paris all have a similar sense of morality, no matter what their cultural or religious backgrounds. There seems to be a common consciousness that binds us, that tells us "It's wrong to kill" or "it feels good to give a dollar to a homeless man."
Why? Who decided what's right and what's wrong in the first place? Can there be standards of morality without a God to set that standard?
It's a philosophical question worth pondering, I think.
Quite happy to have someone intelligent speak for me. Not always able to bumble out what I'm trying to say.
I think it's something of an evolutionary thing, which is what I was getting at with my question of why wild animals don't just kill each other. It's wrong to kill because that unbalances the population, it's good to give a dollar to a homeless man because that keeps the harmony in the population, etc. Obviously, that's taking it down to a very basic level.
See, I would think -- and I'm just being devil's advocate here -- that kind of sensitivity would be counter-evolutionary.
If I'm a lion, I want all the meat I can get, even if I have to kill another lion for it. And I'm sure as shit not sharing my dead zebra with another lion.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
i just think there's got to be something up there. maybe not "God" per-say, or anything that any religion describes. but for us to be here and for the universe to even have ever been created, there has to be some higher power or superior energy. and Eddie has said that in numerous instances as well. thinking about how the universe ever came to be is just impossible .. how time and space began .. fuck.. i mean, something has to be out there.
I don't know. The more I think about it, the more I think that the universe must be like most things in it...incredibly weird. Take the humble avocado. Please. But, consider it, if you will. It is a package of instructions, which when combined with the right conditions, does somethings worthy of worship. Here is a plant that make oil out of nothing. Well, actually out of instructions. It does not get oil from anywhere. It makes oil from no oil. It is godly on its own, if you will. So is everything around us. The entire universe functions this way, including you and me. From the inanimate comes the animate. From nothing everything. I think there is an underlying order to our universe. I am not sure this underlying order is god, so to speak. But if it is, we are god. A little part. And so is everything. My feeling is that we are one of countless universes, and each got whatever it did with its own underlying order--not necessarily the same as ours. We're here to observe this universe--apparently observers are all the rage in this universe. Why? Maybe the universe knows--or maybe the universe needs us or something like us in order to know. Maybe we are the universe's best shot at understanding itself. In which case...not the best, most foolproof God that can be envisioned. I'm not sure a rule maker is necessary for us to be here, just as no rule maker is necessary for particles to come into existence and then wink out. It seems just impossible, but...according to the rules, not only is it possible, it must be.
Not to speak for him, but I think what he meant was this:
How does man instinctively know what is right and what is wrong? People in Sri Lanka, Alaska and Paris all have a similar sense of morality, no matter what their cultural or religious backgrounds. There seems to be a common consciousness that binds us, that tells us "It's wrong to kill" or "it feels good to give a dollar to a homeless man."
Why? Who decided what's right and what's wrong in the first place? Can there be standards of morality without a God to set that standard?
It's a philosophical question worth pondering, I think.
See, I would think -- and I'm just being devil's advocate here -- that kind of sensitivity would be counter-evolutionary.
If I'm a lion, I want all the meat I can get, even if I have to kill another lion for it. And I'm sure as shit not sharing my dead zebra with another lion.
Here is my thought:
There is a difference between laws and morality. Under a world without god, murder can still be a crime under law. But can it be judged immoral? Would these laws in a godless society be more for order, and not morality, since we are all just animals without souls?
Here is my takeaway on this, since somebody could say this is a meaningless debate. My point is that under atheism, somebody (say Hitler) can just justify doing horrible things because human life has no inherent value morally. Yeah, what he did was illegal, but in his mind it was not morally wrong, and if it is not morally wrong, is it wrong? This could lead to a very slippery slope in a world with no morality. I was going to bring up the A word (Rhymes with Contortion), but that is a whole other debate.
I'm a Christian but to say that a moral society can only exist in a world with a belief in God is ridiculous. That's pretty much admitting that the only purpose for God is a fear tactic into "doing the right thing." A thought like that really turns atheists into savages, and in turn, humans by nature as savages without the direction of God. I think there is much more reason for God than this.
I don't remember who this post was directed to, but I remember these sentiments being discussed earlier in this topic.
It falls under doing what is right and what is wrong, just because I don't believe there is a heaven or a hell doesn't mean I should end the life and hope someone else would have same respect for me. WAY more people are killed over religon than over lack of, just look at middle east, or Nazi history.
Just my 2 cents...
I think, like someone I think already mentioned before, that power and money are the root of 99.9% of wars. Religion is just a smoke curtain. Yes, even in the case of the nazis and the middle east, although the latter is questionable.
Either way, I'm not well informed about this specific subject so I might be right or wrong, but I do believe there's something fishy in most of those historic "religious" conflicts.
See, I would think -- and I'm just being devil's advocate here -- that kind of sensitivity would be counter-evolutionary.
If I'm a lion, I want all the meat I can get, even if I have to kill another lion for it. And I'm sure as shit not sharing my dead zebra with another lion.
There's a difference between killing for competition and killing just cos it's "not wrong", though. If you're a lion, you kill enough to eat, nothing more. As long as every other lion does the same, everything's good.
Also, I'm pretty much stealing this right out of Ishmael, so if you've read that, just ignore me.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
My point was merely that he talks about God far more than someone who I would think is a true atheist. Usually if one doesn't believe in something, the topic is not usually something they bring up often. He often metions matters of faith and God.
I don't know the man, I don't know his true thoughts. If he flat out stated he is an atheist, maybe he is. Just doesn't matter to me. I was stating my experience with friends and others who have said they are atheists. When push comes to shove, they aren't.
"...since somebody could say this is a meaningless debate. My point is that under atheism, somebody (say Hitler) can just justify doing horrible things because human life has no inherent value morally. Yeah, what he did was illegal, but in his mind it was not morally wrong, and if it is not morally wrong, is it wrong? This could lead to a very slippery slope in a world with no morality. I was going to bring up the A word (Rhymes with Contortion), but that is a whole other debate."
Wouldn't you agree that people also do horrible things in the name of religion? ..and justify killing, persecution, prejudice, etc. in the name of their god/religion?
Comments
I agree with this....though every snake-handler I've ever met has been a dick.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
I do not consider myself an atheist, however I do not believe in "God" in the traditional sense.
I believe we are all connected and that collectively we are "the higher power."
Listening to Ed all these years, I think he has a similar insight.
I like Elton John's music (yes I admitted it here), and I don't care what his sexuality is. It's all about the music!
That's a good point. I hate those motherfuckers.
for the least they could possibly do
Until you realize "Your Song" was written about a dude .... eewww!
for the least they could possibly do
Agnostic believes in a god but not in religion. I'm amazed that people can't believe when Ed says "I don't believe in god" and take it for truth, even when it comes from his own mouth multiple times. What more do you need?
What would he gain from saying he doesn't believe in god? I bet more of his listeners believe in a god of some kind, rather than don't.
They can't seem to accept it for what it is. Perhaps it hurts to believe someone you look up too doesn't share your belief and the songs you take as spouting perhaps religious leanings that compliment your own belief, are maybe not meant that way at all. I don't know. I'm facinated by the denial that happens.
I am an athiest, comepletey an athiest. It took years of study of the many religions of the world and many great works of philosophy to come to the realization that I don't believe in any religion or god. I'm not confused, I'm not undecided..I don't believe in a God of any kind.
But, I still use the term "Good God" all the time, I also say, "Thank God" and "God Damn it" and many other terms reflecting what some might take as a belief in a higher being. But honestly, it's out of habit and for lack of a better exclamation. I will say something touches my very soul, but it's because people will understand what that means not because I believe I have a soul to go to heaven or hell. It doesn't make me less of an athiest or suddenly an agnostic, just makes me uncreative in my speaking.
There are no rules for athiests to follow except we don't believe in gods or religion. But, morals don't come from religion. Morals come from an understanding of what's right and what's wrong, you can learn that without religion. I hold myself to the same tenents, I don't lie, I don't steal, I treat others as I would like to be treated, I don't commit adultry, I don't kill .It means I take reposibility for my own actions.
And in terms of morals - I can't help feeling like people would be behave with more respect and courtesy if the responsibility to do so was all on them, if we all just accepted that this life now is all there is, our only chance to do good for each other...didn't mean to get involved in this stuff on a band message board but there it it. Eddie announced it to a packed garden and I raised my fist in the air.
While I agree that killing is wrong, why is it wrong to atheists? Under atheism there is no god. We are all just atoms and molecules and nothing more. One atheist says killing is wrong. Another atheist says killing is okay. Who is to say either is right? Killing is a case of one set of molecules killing another set of molecules, just like a lion killing a zebra. It is survival of the fittest.
Under religion, there is a creator who has provided the moral law. No moral law has been provided under a world created by atoms. In fact, it doesn't need one. Atheists can create one, but they cannot defend it against one who disagrees.
So why don't lions, dogs, whatever, kill each other all the time? Do they believe in god?
You fail to understand that even these fuckers aren't doing things in the name of religion. the islam faith doesn't condone what they did -- they did it for their own personal ideals, twisting around the religion at its very core, thinking they were doing it for 'Allah.' You won't find many religions that preach violence.......people that do practice it are extremists.
2004 Boston I
2006 Boston I
2008 Bonnaroo, Hartford, Mansfield I
2010 Hartford
2013 Worcester I, Worcester II, Hartford
2016 Bonnaroo, Boston I, Boston II
2018 Boston I, Boston II
2021 Sea.Hear.Now
2022 Camden
2024 Boston I, Boston II
I could only speak for myself but believing in God isn't always easy. I do question a lot of things but I still believe but I guess that's having faith.
Actually, this isn't quite true. An agnostic concedes that there may or may not be a God, but that there's really no way of knowing. Based on many of Ed's lyrics, I would assume this is what Ed believes.
Because other words have come from his mouth, at others times, that would seem to contradict that. Another thing is, people's beliefs and perceptions in this area are subject to change all the time -- so it's silly to say, "Well, on Aug 5, 1993, Ed said he didn't believe in God, so that must be what he believes now."
People want to bring up the latest MSG comment as firm proof of Ed's beliefs, but those of us who were there realize the context of the comment, and that it was kind of done in jest. So definitive proof it ain't.
My overall point is that there is no way of knowing what Ed truly believes on this subject. You could say I'm agnostic when it comes to the subject of Ed's atheism.
for the least they could possibly do
yes there are. i dont recall ever believing in God with any conviction. i remember being agnostic. then at 11 i came to the conclusion it was all bullshit and i became an atheist. i have NEVER doubted God's nonexistence and i have never wavered. though i do think jesus was a real man.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
thank you. i know that story. i guess maybe i was just being too flippant. though i was more thinking lukin is a straight out story. whereas others of his require more depth of thought.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It falls under doing what is right and what is wrong, just because I don't believe there is a heaven or a hell doesn't mean I should end the life and hope someone else would have same respect for me. WAY more people are killed over religon than over lack of, just look at middle east, or Nazi history.
http://www.myspace.com/lizardkings1
(This Post May Have Been Edited By AT&T)
I concede I mistyped what an agnostic is. I had deist in mind as I thinking of how to respond.
While I'm not here to prove or disprove anything on Ed's beliefs, I am only pointing out what Ed has stated on multiple occasions. He says it very clearly without any side story. You can only go on what he has actually stated, not what we might interpret his other less distinct refrences might mean.
By the way, I was at MSG. I don't think it was taken out of context. He seemed amused by thanking God as if that was the joke and then he stated he didn't believe in God. Why wouldn't you take it at face value?
As I've mentioned elsewhere on this thread, I don't think Ed believes in the Judeo-Christian conception of God. And I think that's what he meant with the statement he referenced.
But I would not be surprised if he believed in some sort of more general conception of "god" or "something bigger" or "a higher power."
for the least they could possibly do
Sure, but it was man that created the story of religion and god and therefore man who created these laws of morality.
These same morals are pretty well established within every culture through the law, through social norms learned in school, through good parenting, and by all other means that we learn as we grow.
Without religion these same basic moral guidelines would still exist.
These morals are defended by the society that adheres to them, which just happens to be how it works now.
Those with religion and those without break these laws and there is usually consequence.
Not to speak for him, but I think what he meant was this:
How does man instinctively know what is right and what is wrong? People in Sri Lanka, Alaska and Paris all have a similar sense of morality, no matter what their cultural or religious backgrounds. There seems to be a common consciousness that binds us, that tells us "It's wrong to kill" or "it feels good to give a dollar to a homeless man."
Why? Who decided what's right and what's wrong in the first place? Can there be standards of morality without a God to set that standard?
It's a philosophical question worth pondering, I think.
for the least they could possibly do
I think it's something of an evolutionary thing, which is what I was getting at with my question of why wild animals don't just kill each other. It's wrong to kill because that unbalances the population, it's good to give a dollar to a homeless man because that keeps the harmony in the population, etc. Obviously, that's taking it down to a very basic level.
Quite happy to have someone intelligent speak for me. Not always able to bumble out what I'm trying to say.
See, I would think -- and I'm just being devil's advocate here -- that kind of sensitivity would be counter-evolutionary.
If I'm a lion, I want all the meat I can get, even if I have to kill another lion for it. And I'm sure as shit not sharing my dead zebra with another lion.
for the least they could possibly do
I don't know. The more I think about it, the more I think that the universe must be like most things in it...incredibly weird.
I agree with what you've said.
Here is my thought:
There is a difference between laws and morality. Under a world without god, murder can still be a crime under law. But can it be judged immoral? Would these laws in a godless society be more for order, and not morality, since we are all just animals without souls?
Here is my takeaway on this, since somebody could say this is a meaningless debate. My point is that under atheism, somebody (say Hitler) can just justify doing horrible things because human life has no inherent value morally. Yeah, what he did was illegal, but in his mind it was not morally wrong, and if it is not morally wrong, is it wrong? This could lead to a very slippery slope in a world with no morality. I was going to bring up the A word (Rhymes with Contortion), but that is a whole other debate.
I don't remember who this post was directed to, but I remember these sentiments being discussed earlier in this topic.
3 Decibels Doubles the Volume
2006
Just my 2 cents...
I think, like someone I think already mentioned before, that power and money are the root of 99.9% of wars. Religion is just a smoke curtain. Yes, even in the case of the nazis and the middle east, although the latter is questionable.
Either way, I'm not well informed about this specific subject so I might be right or wrong, but I do believe there's something fishy in most of those historic "religious" conflicts.
♪ Juli ♪
There's a difference between killing for competition and killing just cos it's "not wrong", though. If you're a lion, you kill enough to eat, nothing more. As long as every other lion does the same, everything's good.
Also, I'm pretty much stealing this right out of Ishmael, so if you've read that, just ignore me.
I don't know the man, I don't know his true thoughts. If he flat out stated he is an atheist, maybe he is. Just doesn't matter to me. I was stating my experience with friends and others who have said they are atheists. When push comes to shove, they aren't.
"...since somebody could say this is a meaningless debate. My point is that under atheism, somebody (say Hitler) can just justify doing horrible things because human life has no inherent value morally. Yeah, what he did was illegal, but in his mind it was not morally wrong, and if it is not morally wrong, is it wrong? This could lead to a very slippery slope in a world with no morality. I was going to bring up the A word (Rhymes with Contortion), but that is a whole other debate."
Wouldn't you agree that people also do horrible things in the name of religion? ..and justify killing, persecution, prejudice, etc. in the name of their god/religion?
Happens every day...