Left to our own devices, mankind is doomed to submit to perversions and deviancy. Dedication and loyalty are not instilled into one without God's light. This is evident in societies where Christian morality is not present. The default position held by people is to seek dopamine release, which is incredibly destructive without a strong and disciplined family unit. Fornication such as that with the same sex and animals are unavoidable without Christian doctrine being adhered to by a governing body. This is why we have begun see a decline in morality in Western nations over the past half of a century. The only way to reverse the decay is to return Christ back to His rightful place over man.
>>18244980that pic is too flattering for that weasel lard blob
just be godly yourself and do good :)
>>18244980The problem in the west is that after world war 2, the baby boomers grew up as spoiled children. As spoiled children, they never stopped believing in santa clause. They didn't realise that they were suppose to deliver the presents once they became the adults.Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
>>18245025They sacrificed their childrens future to moloch, and retired in their beds, dreaming about an afterlife that was all about them.
jesus did not rise from the dead and he's never coming back.
Their malice may be concealed by deception, but their wickedness will be exposed in the assembly.
>>18244980http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan
>>18245075East Asia is rotting from the inside just like the decadent west
Morality predates your specific desert god by thousands of years. Basic ethics like don't murder, don't steal exist in every civilization from Buddhist to secular humanist societies. You just lack imagination.
>>18245110>source: I want it to be true
>>18245075Japan is the most decadent and depraved country on Earth. Them not nigging out and shooting each other doesn't make them moral. Not to mention how sociopathic they were before the US civilized them with nukes. Even the Nazis found them barbaric.
>>18244980To answer the question, no. Man needs a system of virtue ethics to be moral and religion with its eternal punishment/reward structure is a great motivator for people to follow virtue ethics, but is not necessarily needed for one to do so. Atheists by and large follow no system of virtue ethics aside from what "muh feelings" dictate and are exceptionally inconsistent with determining right and wrong action.
>>18246293Thermoreception is a feeling. At the end of the day you just shouldn't do certain things because they are wrong.
>>18244980Morality is unimportant for maintaining a civilization as prooven by Roman empire (went completely degenerate in republic times but nonetheless continued to flourish for hundreds of years) or any east Asian country.
>>18246291>no arguments, figures or examples>It just is!
>>18246488NTA but common knowledge facts support his case. They were Nazi-tier and had to be put in order by an outside force.
>>18244980Feminism disproves that objective religious morality exists.Christians oppressed women and pretended that was will of the God.Now Christians are pro women rights and pretend that is the same will of the god when this is moral stance is 180 opposite to what they preached in teh past.Therefore there is no any objective religious morals, that is just social Flavor of the Month.
>>18244980OP, I have a question for you. If Christianity did not correlate with societal health, would you still follow it?
>>18246293Religious people by and large do not follow virtue ethics and instead have some sort of deontological understanding of ethics. Out of all the metaethical frameworks, virtue ethics is probably also the easiest to make sense of under atheism.
>>18246532>Christians oppressed women and pretended that was will of the God>Now Christians are pro women rights>180 oppositeThese are not opposite at all. A certain point in history came when we could afford to expand women's rights in the political and economic domain. Doesn't mean anyone was pro-oppression before. Oppression is inherent to any normative institution such as a government or a church and it was indeed the will of God that institutions exist. The objective religious morals are that every person is the image of God. That this means everyone's opinion on a political candidate matters is a very, very distant implication and nowhere near the central moral tenet that you think it is.
>>18246532>Christians oppressed women and pretended that was will of the God.>Now Christians are pro women rights and pretend that is the same will of the god when this is moral stance is 180 opposite to what they preached in teh past.It's also destroyed western civilization and the West is now being flooded by Muslims to replace all those aborted babies so it seems the older generations were right.
>>18246585>These are not opposite at all. A certain point in history came when we could afford to expand women's rights in the political and economic domain. Doesn't mean anyone was pro-oppression before.Your mental gymnastics just another proof religious objective morals doesn't exist. Christians would invent excuses for any behavior.>this is wasn't oppression hurr durr!>>18246820>so it seems the older generations were right.so it seems "objective religious morals" of Christians failed.Though you can make argument that only Muslim society can be truly moral leaning on their God for rights answers for anything.
>>18246870>>so it seems the older generations were right.>so it seems "objective religious morals" of Christians failedWomen being housewives, bearing children and not being over men is in the Bible. The objectives failed when people betrayed them.
We invented the entire concept of righteous suffering by worshipping a torture victim. Our prime directive is love your enemy while our history is conquest and inquisition. The only thing more terrifying than a society without God is one that believes it has a monopoly on Him.
No, Mbambtu, I will not import your African ways into my fatherland.
>>18247095Europeans were no different 100 years ago when at the indisputable height of their power. Gaytheism came along with decadence and decline, just like it always has.
>>18246957>The objectives failed when people betrayed them.That is point. Religious people turned on these moral 180 despite declaration that their morals are "objective". THeir morals are just trying to get on moral high horse and slapping women and sending them to kitchen is not cool and hip today on the West.
>>18246870>>this is wasn't oppression hurr durr!This was the opposite of what I claimed. If you want to give it another go, I'm here for you. If you're satisfied with strawmanning and scapegoating, I am fine with that too.
>>18247169ROFL Europe secularization was already well underway in the early 20th century. Keep coping, Bumba.
>>18247329You can't answer straight was oppression of women in the past moraly wrong or right. You can only evade an answer.You have no morals. It's all I need to know about objective religious morals.
>>18244980Yes, but what do we need morality for?
>>18248307To avoid poopoo peepee world.
>>18248313Yeah well, the other day I missed a bus and had to walk the road for 6 hours, no one picked me up for a ride. If that's how religion fixes the world, no thank you. I'm staying independent spiritually
>>18248317>I had to walk 6 hours to fight poopoo peepee worldThanks!
>>18244980Its not possible to be truly moral if you are only doing it to appease some demon.
>>18245075Shinto believes that everything is some kind of god or some fraction of god, though.
>>18246293>and are exceptionally inconsistentAtheists aren't the ones who need over 9000 holy sacraments to excuse all their inconsistent application of moral principles.
>>18246585>Doesn't mean anyone was pro-oppression before.They were and we know because there are surviving sects that still practice the old pro-oppressive ways instead of adapting to the modern status quo.
>>18248461The only sacrament that does that is confession and it's not to excuse but to forgive. Wrong doings are still acknowledged as wrong.
>>18248479>Wrong doings are still acknowledged as wrong.Is it wrong to oppress women and deny them rights?
>>18248479No, baptism, confirmation, communion, penance, and matrimony are also all about making potentially dirty actions "clean" and cleansing the soul of wrongdoing you may or may not even know you did.
>>18244980moral = leftistbtw if you need god to not suck dick, you're already a fag.
>>18248481The right to kill their babies so they can be sluts without consequence? Absolutely
>>18248493I genuinely cannot imagine being this retarded. Yes, the entire point of matrimony is forgiveness of sins. You're correct.
>>18248516You are the retard that tried to shift the goalpost to forgiving sins, that isn't what I said, I said the sacraments exist to resolve moral inconsistencies inherent in the belief system, being able to be forgiven for sinning is just one such inconsistency.
>>18248481Not under Darwinian atheism, which is why it is right.wing and Christsimpery is left-wing.
>>18248521Imagine being so retarded that you believe matrimony exists to resolve moral inconsistency. You can change the goalposts all you like but your argument remains severely retarded and based on a lack of basic comprehension.
>>18248529it does, its literally all about how sex is bad, unless you do it in this very specific way blessed by the church leaders.
>>18248537Casual sex is bad. It leads to unplanned pregnancies, disease, child murder, infidelity, broken families, etc. Not a single good thing has come from it. There's a reason almost every single religion and system of ethics worldwide warns against it.
>>18248544>There's a reason almost every single religion and system of ethics worldwide warns against it.I don't see Pope leading Christian movement to criminlize adultery and excommunicate sluts from the Church.
>>18248544> There's a reason almost every single religion and system of ethics worldwide warns against it.Because all of them are controlled by old boomers who are impotents and hate young folks whose members are hard and strong so they want to sabotage them.
>>18248544>Casual sex is bad.Unless of course you sex within the confines of a blessed matrimony is casual, then it is a holy sacrament because the whole reason sacraments exist is to resolve necessary moral inconsistencies like how the thing necessary for life to proliferate is actually a really bad thing to do in most cases.
>>18248551You're only proving the point that atheists can't be moral
>>18248556> moral is when you incel yourself because boomer priest said soSexhaver conspiracy is amoral. FACT.
>>18248554Casual sex = sleeping around. Sleeping around is not allowed within matrimony. That's called adultery. Keep trying though.
>>18244980how can christcucks justify slavery?How can a society full of slaves be considered moral?
>>18248557Remember not to get upset when your boyfriend cheats on you and gives you HIV. Only boomer priests would deny him complete sexual freedom.
>>18248560How do fake atheist justify anti-slavery?
>>18248559>Casual sex = sleeping around.No, that isn't what casual means, casual means informal, not extramarital.>Sleeping around is not allowed within matrimony. It depends on the organization, ones that endorse polygamous matrimony, allows for sleeping around with all of your spouses.
>>18248556But not all theists actually agree that casual sex is bad, so you are proving that theistic morals are not actually objective and that the magical demon in charge of a religion will change depending on the general status quo.
>>18248567>Casual sex is sexual activity that takes place outside a romantic relationship and implies an absence of commitment, emotional attachment, or familiarity between sexual partners. Examples are sexual activity while casually dating, one-night stands, prostitution or swinging and friends with benefits relationships.> Adultery refers to sexual acts between a married person and someone who is not that person's spouse.
>>18248554>Unless of course you sex within the confines of a blessed matrimonyNot true, christcucks think ALL sex is bad. You should cut off your testicles and become a eunuch for God.
>>18248562https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/antislavery-arguments-overview
>>18248578>During the eighteenth century, Quakers Benjamin Lay, Anthony Benezet, and John Woolman based their disagreement with slavery on their Christian instruction. Their central belief in the equality of all people meant that holding other persons in bondage was in violation of God's law. In addition, their pacifist ideals were at odds with the possibility of slave insurrection. If a Quaker owned slaves who attempted to revolt, that Quaker would be in direct conflict with upholding peace in putting down the insurrection.>In the last few decades of the 1700s, religiously inspired principles were coupled with the notions of equality, liberty, and freedom generated during the Revolutionary War and the forming of the United States of America.Religious nonsense and an unscientific belief in the equality of people, so it is just bullshit.Atheists cannot be anti-slavery or liberal. You're just a stealth Christcuck.
>>18248570The vast majority of religions do, such as Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Bahai, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etcI'm aware a few don't such as Shinto/Animism but those religions tend to completely lack ethical codes altogether. And of course there are self professed members of religions that intentionally do not follow its teachings and go as far as to choose to reinterpret it to fit their wishes. Those people are called hypocrites.
>>18248575So friends with benefits doesn't count as casual sex since there is a familiar committed relationship involved? It only counts as casual if you are having sex with a stranger?
If God has a problem with a godless society he can just come back for five minutes and let us know.Especially if the god in question is YHWH, who is known for having regularly visited Earth in the past
>>18248585>Examples are sexual activity while casually dating, one-night stands, prostitution or swinging and friends with benefits relationships.
>>18248584>The vast majority oI accept your concession, its not all religions, only the ones who have gone on barbaric multinational conquests and murdered a bunch of their rivals while burning their libraries and store of records.
>>18248588But that isn't consistent with the definition you provided for the reasons I provided that contradict the reasons you gave as defining the casualness.> implies an absence of commitment, emotional attachment, or familiarity between sexual partners.None of that is absent in a fwb situationship or even when people live together out of wedlock which I am sure you also consider "casual" even if they are on each other's insurance, but haven't done the religious rituals.
>>18248587uh bro you don't get it, freewill or something (please ignore those times were he happily unleashed shit ranging from ending entire civilizations to sending some bears after some dudes for mocking a guy he liked)
>>18248590>There's a reason almost every single religion and system of ethics worldwide warns against it.Note how I said almost. I'm well aware not every religion has a system of ethics, but the vast majority do. >barbaric multinational conquests and murdered a bunch of their rivals while burning their libraries and store of records.Sounds more like commies.
>>18248594>>Casual sex is sexual activity that takes place outside a romantic relationship and implies an absence of commitment, emotional attachment, or familiarity between sexual partnersFriends with benefits. Re-read that title more slowly. If you're friends, you're not in a committed relationship. You're just friends having sex with each other and depending on how you define friends, it's no different from a repeat casual encounter with a stranger. You reaching so hard it's becoming comical
>>18248605Yes commie collectives are just like other commie collective whether they shroud themselves in religious nonsense or not, they all just strive for social power and change their ethics and morals based on the constantly shifting social zeitgeist instead of any stable objective rules.
>>18248608>you're not in a committed relationship.Friendship is a committed platonic relationship, though which is why you also used words like familiarity and attachment which is also things that arise with people in committed relationships with each other.>it's no different from a repeat casual encounter with a stranger.They aren't a stranger if you have had repeated encounters with them, retard.
>>18248612So if someone fucks the same hooker every week for a year, are they now fwb? Instead of being unbelievably obtuse, why don't you actually go back to the subject and define why casual sex is innately ethical despite the severely negative impact it has on society and relationships?
>I need daddy to get shold of meYou know, they give guns to people like this
>>18248614>So if someone fucks the same hooker every week for a year, are they now fwb?They aren't strangers, that is for sure, but if they help each other move and/or make other commitments that are consistent with friendship, then yeah.>define why casual sex is innately ethical despite the severely negative impact it has on society and relationships?It is neither innately ethical nor innately unethical, sometimes good things happen sometimes bad things happen, which is why sacraments exist to try to resolve the inconsistent morality of sex having by inventing rules and protocols, but even then not all marriage sex is good.
Question: Suppose you meet a demon, you have it on good authority that this is a very ancient being, and definitely not abrahamic. The demon is playful, and means you harm, but if you pass his test he ppromises it's going to be for the good of mankind. Nonchalantly, he hands you a device, it's much like a PDA, but modern, he says, this device is for man to have no god no master: you will rule over yourselves Network voting in the style of greek democracy. But there is a cavear, as specified, you shall have no gods and no masters, so no religion, in it's stead, you will use any spiritual discipline, be it qigong, yoga, tantra, high magick or meditation to get a hold of your vices which you're allowed to have. Do you Accept?
>>18244980I'll consider it when I see the christian population being considerably better people than their countries average.
>>18248629Mormons and Mennonites
>>18244980From an evolutionary standpoint, religion helps create stronger community bonds and therefore enhance cooperation. It does not necessarily lead to what other groups of people, outside of that community, would consider good morals.
>>18248632That's not the christian population tho.Unless you meant they're the only God guided people, and the rest are false believers.
>>18248638I'm sure they believe they are
Morality is woke nonsense.
>>18248633>From an evolutionary standpoint, religion helps create stronger community bonds and therefore enhance cooperation.>Christians be like yes we need more brown people imported into white countries Jesus is the King!
>>18248658Yeah and Its not like christians have functioning outposts in nearly every port in the world that generally allows them to travel freely due to their inclusiveness and its reciprocation or anything.
>>18246500>they were>anon made a claim about the presentKeep up.
>>18249055Anon made a claim about both the present and the past, retard
>>18244980It could never be moral with one either. If you don't know that you have no business posting on /his/
