>you can have morality without godexplain to me why we can't produce cp then.>because childern can't give consentaccording to who? Why do we "feel" morally obligated to protect childern?
Because I said so. Just insert me in place of God when thinking about the source of moral commandments.
Abrahamic religions have literally abused billions of kids.
>>17433246because people with power decided that you can't, simple as that. replace god with humans that can kill you and the effect is the same.
>>17433249>>17433252isn't this a Nietzschian talking point though? when you come to the conclusion that god isn't real/or an apathetic douche it isn't surprising to then witness the rising popular figures try to play god on earth. the bibles filled with stories similar in tone to this very concept. but back to ops question more importantly is why making deepfake porn illegal? you're not actually harassing anyone by doing so
>>17433250If you need God to stop raping children, I have bad news for you, objective morality fans.
>>17433279Nietzscheanism isn't a coherent societal worldview. Also, stop being a pervert.
>>17433279> isn't this a Nietzschian talking point though?It's more Foucaultian... Truths are promoted by power systems (people in power are just the tip of the iceberg, see below) who use those truths to assert themselves.> Why do we "feel" morally obligated to protect childern?Feeling is promoted by genes to spread themselves. Feeling somehow comes from the genes. Other mammals protect their offspring too. Genes are power system too...
>>17433348>Other mammals protect their offspringthere are literally animals who feed on their own progeny just to survive.and besides how are you gonna discover the truth behind our universe if there is no objective truth? why is it frowned upon to be an opportunist for example?
>>17433348Forgot to ask to do you believe that evangelical couple adopting poor childern from Africa isn't in any way condescending or humiliating? how is this shit even acceptable?
>>17433374>there are literally animals who feed on their own progeny just to survive.And? It used to be common (arguably stilll is) to sell your kids into slavery.Edge cases exist, but generally, mammals protect their offspring from predators, etc.
>>17433246>explain to me why we can't produce cp then.Because we evolved to protect our children and the children of the community from predators.Consent doesn't really need to play into it. The answer is far more simple than that.
>>17433250No, sorry, I have to take that away from you. Telling kids that Jesus loves them is not abuse.
>>17433282but i thought we're nothing more than sentient immoral apes... did r/atheism lie to me?
>>17433279>but back to ops question more importantly is why making deepfake porn illegal?Same reason we hunted wild animals to extinction, and not just scared them away. You don't enable a predator.
>>17433374>there are literally animals who feed on their own progeny just to survive.Humans aren't that animal, and didn't evolve from that animal. Not relevant.
>>17433250Non-jew children so they don't count.
>>17433454>immoralWe're definitely not that. Some people are, such as criminals, narcissists, psychopaths, and sociopaths. The rest of us only need a small amount of teaching to go from being a shitty child that everyone hates, to a normal member of society. The overwhelming majority of our morals aren't needed to be taught. Just a bit, like the consequences of disobeying them.
>>17433246Actually I think it’s you who needs to explain why we can’t produce CP.I’m not seeing the problem.
>>17433374> If there is no objective truth?There is no objective truth “behind” the universe. There is only an objective universe and subjective beliefs that give you as much power over it as they are true, i.e. what makes the idea that I can kill you with a gun true and the idea that I can kill you with a magic spell false is that one works and the other sort of doesn't. One gives you power and the other doesn't. We discover what is true by understanding what gives power and what does not. A powerless objective truth is just one's idea of what reality “really” is, it is still powerless and has no relevance to objective reality and how it works.> there are literally animals who feed on their own progeny just to survive.Eh... People probably did that to, when pushed into starvation. There are stories from famines all over the world that are not for the faint of heart.....> why is it frowned upon to be an opportunist for example?Is it really frowned upon? My point is that many people get angry at others breaking their commitments, and that requires no explanation, but actually go the opportunist route when the opportunity presents itself. There is public morality, and there is a private attitude of a different kind, perhaps a more honest one.>>17433397I'm not sure about the question. Is it better to like... let the child die to not be condescending? Never really bothered to check what happens to adopted children either actually.
>>17433463Evolution is a myth. We were created by GOD in his image. And GOD never betrays his children.
>>17433474>subjective beliefsOnce you agree on the end goal, even with your subjective beliefs, there's still an objective goal.>People probably did that to, when pushed into starvationWay less than you'd think. Most people choose starvation, over human cannibalism.>Is it really frowned uponVery. It's only allowed to continue in low trust societies that are disconnected from each other. In high trust societies, the opportunist will get away with it for a bit, then gets jailed/exiled/killed.
>>17433246>explain to me why we can't produce cp then.The simplest reason is because the production of CP harms children (and indirectly leads to their harm) and harm to children is widely considered bad.Also you aren't physically incapable of it. You just will be punished for it. In the most concrete sense, you can.>according to who?Concensus, Natural principles, something like that.>Why do we "feel" morally obligated to protect childern?Instictual response that endears us to the young and makes us want to take care of them. It's not really a rational thing. Which is why I disagree with the idea of morality being an objective rational thing.
>>17433246>Why do we "feel" morally obligated to protect childern?Because we evolved to. This is a terrible argument but religious people are less intelligent so I expect that.
>>17433246All the coherent ethical theories can provide a reason why. In fact, a theist and an atheist would share these reasons. Child porn involves rape. Rape is ethically impermissible under rule utilitarianism because it fundamentally violates the principles that support a society's well-being and harmony. Rule utilitarianism emphasizes the establishment of rules that promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number. A rule permitting or tolerating rape would lead to fear, mistrust, and pervasive harm, destabilizing the social fabric, all of which are negative consequences. Since rules allowing rape would create far more harm than good, they cannot be justified under rule utilitarian principles.From the perspective of Kantian ethics, rape is a categorical violation of the moral law that requires treating others as ends in themselves rather than as mere means. Kantian ethics is grounded in respect for autonomy and human dignity. Rape, by its nature, dehumanizes the victim and uses them solely as an instrument for the perpetrator's gratification. This act denies the victim’s ability to consent and undermines their inherent worth as a rational being, making it categorically impermissible regardless of any consequences.Similarly, virtue ethics condemns rape because it directly opposes the cultivation of virtues such as respect, compassion, and justice. Rape prevents flourishing and disorders the mind and body, especially in a child. A virtuous individual seeks to act in ways that reflect moral excellence and promote human flourishing. Rape exemplifies extreme moral vice, including cruelty, selfishness, and a disregard for the well-being of others. Engaging in or permitting rape corrupts both the individual and the community, making it incompatible with the pursuit of virtuous living and a just society.
Natural law theory holds that moral principles are derived from human nature and the purpose inherent in it, as determined by reason. Central to natural law is the idea that every human being has intrinsic dignity and a right to pursue their natural ends, such as life, health, procreation, and social harmony. Rape fundamentally violates these natural ends by disregarding the victim's autonomy, inflicting physical and emotional harm, and undermining the moral purpose of human sexuality, which should be expressed in a context of mutual consent and respect. Doing so to children further damages them for physical and mental reasons. In other words you stop them from realizing their telos. uman beings are social creatures, and the flourishing of society depends on mutual respect, trust, and cooperation. Rape erodes these foundational principles, fostering fear, division, and injustice. Further, humans need to care for their young, so hurting them and impeding their development would be unethical. As such, natural law theory categorically rejects the ethical permissibility of rape, as it is incompatible with the rational order and purpose inherent in human nature.The only difference between the theist view and atheist view is basically whether there is the role of one entity, God. Nothing else really changes.
>christians would literally rush to the streets to rape, maim and murder old ladies, children and dogs the second they realize their "god" is not realkek
>>17433470This is a position called intuitionism. The idea is that health physical and mental development outside of a high control enviroment will allow for people to intuit moral principles on their own for the most part.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BaWl2xDthE>>17433501This is type of metaethical naturalism. You don't even need to appeal to evolution. It could just be that we are constituted as such that pain is naturally bad and that is enough to know.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMGNfCrUqrshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO_R8gPJllI&t=4shttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw_a8NXZwMw
>>17433246>explain to me why we can't produce cp then.People agree it's bad, and at a deeper level, it's traumatizing to the kids, which is definitely bad.>according to who? Why do we "feel" morally obligated to protect childern?Because we're not psychopaths like you.
>>17433449For thousands of years, the Abrahamic religions have institutionalized child mutilation, with billions of kids butchered in the name of some vengeful sky daddy. Circumcision—an ancient blood ritual—has been sanitized and normalized, but it’s still the same barbaric abuse: slicing up defenseless infants to appease outdated dogma. Jews and Muslims turned it into a cornerstone of their faith, while Christians in the West jumped on the bandwagon for social conformity and profit. It’s nothing but a legacy of control, submission, and bodily violation, where the most vulnerable are sacrificed to maintain a system of obedience and fear. They call it tradition or faith, but it’s really just centuries of normalized trauma disguised as holiness. This isn’t just history—it’s ongoing, infecting secular societies under the guise of “health benefits” or “progress.” Millions of boys are still strapped down and mutilated without consent, their bodies altered for life to serve the egos of parents and the profits of doctors. The psychological scars run deep, creating generations of people forced to reconcile with a betrayal they didn’t even choose. This is the Abrahamic legacy: a global system of institutionalized abuse and trauma, perpetuated by cultures too cowardly to reject their barbaric roots. It’s not faith—it’s mass mutilation masquerading as morality.
>>17433635>This is a position called intuitionismI know, but I don't find that using the philosophy terms actually gets people to engage. The majority of people will see a philosophy term and ignore what was said.I just find it easier to just talk about ethics in regular people words, because it usually gets people to pay attention.
>>17433615Child porn isn't necessarily hardcore porn though, it includes underage nudes
>>17433348>FoucaultTell me your mom smoked while pregnant without telling me your mom smoked while pregnant.
ITT: literally this
>>17434304You can't be serious, if God's law stops rape and murder, why are so many Muslims rapists and murderers?
>>17434314>if god real why bad thing happen
>>17434347God happen because bad thing real.
>>17434314Loaded question, the comic says "without God's law, there is nothing stopping..." not "God's law stops rape and murder". You are too low IQ to understand what is being said.
>>17434314God's law defines good and evil - God has given mankind free will to do what they want down here, and all will be judged according to the divine law. And no, muslims aren't following God's law, Mohammad was a liar and an antichrist.
>>17434370>"without God's law, there is nothing stopping...and yet god's law stops nothingcan't break laws of physics, can't break laws of nature
>>17433250No one is talking about Abrahamic religions. OP is talking about an objective moral arbiter. This is not unique to abrahamic religions but is unique to religion in general.
>>17433252The effect isn’t the same. If you can get away with it then you really don’t need to feel any sense of shame also it’s not objectively wrong. It’s the same as being apart of a tribe of cannibals who will kill too unless you take part in their ritual, if you get away with not taking part in their ritual you wouldn’t feel a sense of shame for doing so.
Free will is a lie. It's not profound, it's not special, it's not real. It's the last gasp of human arrogance in the face of a deterministic universe.Every scientific advancement demolishes another pillar of this delusion. Neuroscience, psychology, genetics - they all point to the same cold truth: your actions are predetermined. Your thoughts, your decisions, your so-called choices - they're just the inevitable output of prior causes.Free will apologists are no better than religious fundamentalists clinging to their "god of the gaps." Both desperately search for ever-shrinking pockets of ignorance to hide their beliefs. It's not philosophy. It's not reason. It's fear.You're afraid of a world without free will. Afraid of losing your sense of self, your moral responsibility, your illusion of control. But your fear doesn't change reality. You're a biological machine, your actions as predictable as any physical system, given enough information.There's no magic. No soul. No ghost in the machine. Just cause and effect, playing out as it always has and always will. Your feeling of choice is just that - a feeling. An illusion created by a brain that can't comprehend its own deterministic nature.Wake up. Free will is dead. It was never alive to begin with. You're not the author of your thoughts or actions. You're just another domino in the cosmic chain, falling exactly as you were always going to fall. Deal with it.
>>17433282It is more so that overwhelmingly we find it deeply troubling if raping children was wrong in the way poor manners are wrong. That it was merely unfashionable.Your quip does nothing more than avoid the question.>>17433291A worldview does not need to be coherent. There is no law of the universe stating a worldview must be coherent.
>>17433447Redditors won’t like this because we also evolved to exterminate rival tribes and rape their girls.
>>17433618No but they would be extremely bothered by the fact they have no moral framework by which to condemn those who do rush to the streets.
>>17434050That doesn’t answer the question.So what if there is a psychopath raping children? You just what kill them arbitrarily?What are your reasons? You don’t like them? Enough people don’t like them? We are democratically murdering people?No society has ever lived like this successfully.You can say religion is fake, but the illusion of religion is very real and seems to be necessary. Sorry it outlawed your tranny pills.
>>17434067It’s unique to abrahamic religions nor is it universal in abrahamic religions. You call it mutilation masquerading as morality but how?How do you know it’s not moral without an objective moral standard?
>>17433250This. Friendly reminder that if you are circumcised, then you are a rape victim. There is zero difference between a parent who circumcises their child and a baby rapist. They are objectively identical.
>>17434314God’s law allows you to justify punishment for rape and murder without devolving into punishment people for increasingly arbitrary perceived infractions.
>>17434567>rape is when your parents cut your hair LOLWhat separates a child having their hair cut from circumcision? What separates a child from receiving a vaccine which permanently alters their body composition from circumcision?Are vaccines rape?Define “rape”
>>17434573genital mutilation falls under the category of rape jackass. Especially since in the american tradition it is done with explicit sexual intent
>>17434568> without devolving into punishment people for increasingly arbitrary perceived infractionsLike burning witches for helping villagers with herbal remedies? Press X to doubt.
>>17434573>Are vaccines rape?well...
>>17434567The psychological impact of practices like circumcision and other forms of genital mutilation can vary, but research and anecdotal evidence point to significant potential for harm:1. Trauma and Pain: The procedure, often done without adequate pain relief (especially in infants), can cause immediate trauma. For some, this may result in long-term effects like heightened sensitivity to pain or PTSD-like symptoms.2. Loss of Autonomy: Many people express feelings of violation or resentment over a decision made without their consent, particularly if they later question or reject the cultural, religious, or medical rationale behind it.3. Body Image Issues: Some individuals report feelings of inadequacy, shame, or alienation tied to their altered bodies, especially if they perceive their experience as mutilation or unnatural.4. Sexual Function and Identity: Reduced sensitivity or complications from circumcision can affect sexual experiences, leading to frustration or a diminished sense of sexual identity.5. Cultural and Emotional Conflict: Those from communities where such practices are normalized may struggle with conflicting feelings if they come to view the procedure as harmful. This can create tension with family, faith, or cultural identity.While not everyone experiences significant psychological distress, for those who do, the impact can be profound, shaping their sense of self, relationships, and trust in institutions or cultural traditions.
>>17434573I will now come to you and cut off a piece of your ear, it's just skin right? No, that's assault. Then when someone cuts into your cock that's a sexual organ, ergo, sexual assault.
>>17433246>if god not real why can't I fuck childrenvery christian indeed
>>17433291>stop being a pervertThat voice in your head, telling you that he is a pervert, is God.
