Good without God

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Good without God is a slogan commonly used by Western atheists to advance the notion that one can be good without God (See also: Atheism and morality and Atheism and ethics and Atheist population and immorality).

The psalmist David declared concerning atheists: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." — Psalms 14:1 (KJV)

Richard Carrier's book on atheism and morality

See also: Richard Carrier, adultery, divorce and polyamory

The atheist activist Richard Carrier published a book entitled Sense and Goodness Without God: A Defense of Metaphysical Naturalism. Carrier divorced his wife and now practices polyamory.[1] Before divorcing his wife, he was involved in adulterous affairs.[2]

For more information, please see:

American Humanist Association and the slogan good without God

The American Humanist Association uses the slogan good without God very prominently on their website.[3]

PZ Myers: Humanist awards and his bestiality comments and other ill-behavior

PZ Myers received the American Humanist Association's 2009 Humanist of the Year award and International Humanist Award in 2011.

Atheist animal trainer objects to PZ Myers' comments about bestiality

See also: Atheism and bestiality and Evolutionary belief and bestiality and PZ Myers on bestiality

PZ Myers declared, "...I don’t object to bestiality in a very limited set of specific conditions..."[4][5]

Bestiality is the act of engaging in sexual relations with an animal.

On May 22, 2012, PZ Myers specifies under what conditions he thinks the practice of bestiality would be acceptable.[6]

On November 14, 2014, an atheist animal trainer wrote in response:

We now have the PZ Myers Humanist Guide to Bestiality:
  • 1. IF you are interested in having sex with an animal, AND;
  • 2. That animal is willing to have sex with you, AND;
  • 3. No real harm comes to the animal, AND;
  • 4. You can avoid social stigma by hiding your act;

>> THEN sex with an animal is ethical...

PZ Myers possesses numerous character flaws that make him ill-suited as an A/S/humanism spokesperson and representative: his explosive temper; his violence-tinged threats; his foul language; his preference for personal insults over reasoned debate; his propensity to smear and slander any & all who oppose him;..his willingness to abandon skepticism and science to serve the pomo constructs of radical feminism and social justice warriordom.

Of all these, nothing is more odious, repulsive, or damaging to the reputation of A/S & humanist activism, than Myers’ condoning of bestiality.[7]

Rebuke of PZ Myers by fellow atheists concerning his ill-behavior

See also: PZ Myers and social justice and Atheism and social justice

The Irish atheist Michael Nugent wrote to PZ Myers in September 2014:

Some of the content of your blog is hurtful and unjust in itself, it also undermines the effectiveness of attempts to promote compassion and empathy and social justice, and it is additionally harmful because of your prominence as a perceived spokesperson for organised atheism...

PZ, is this really how you want to be remembered? Having defended you against unjust attacks from others, I am now asking you to take a long hard look at what you are doing, consider apologising to people who you have unjustly hurt and defamed, and start focusing on actually promoting compassion and empathy and social justice if those ideas are important to you.[8]

In April 2015, Atheist Ireland announced, "Atheist Ireland is publicly dissociating itself from the hurtful and dehumanising, hateful and violent, unjust and defamatory rhetoric of the atheist blogger PZ Myers."[9] The atheist biologist Massimo Pigliucci said of Myers, "one cannot conclude this parade without mentioning P.Z. Myers, who has risen to fame because of a blog where the level of nastiness (both by the host and by his readers) is rarely matched anywhere else on the Internet...".[10]

Atheism and the problem of evil

See also: Atheism and the problem of evil and Atheists adopting theistic morality and Atheism and the Euthyphro Dilemma

Theodicy is the branch of study in theology and philosophy that defends the goodness of God despite the existence of evil. In traditional Christianity and Judaism the book of Job is used to explain the existence of evil. In recent times Christian apologists often cite Alvin Plantinga's free will defense in regards to the logical problem of evil.[11] The work of St. Augustine is also cited in regards to theodicy.[12] Dr. Ron Rhodes of Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministry states regarding this issue regarding the existence of evil:

...it is impossible to distinguish evil from good unless one has an infinite reference point which is absolutely good. Otherwise one is like a boat at sea on a cloudy night without a compass (i.e., there would be no way to distinguish north from south without the absolute reference point of the compass needle).

The infinite reference point for distinguishing good from evil can only be found in the person of God, for God alone can exhaust the definition of "absolutely good." If God does not exist, then there are no moral absolutes by which one has the right to judge something (or someone) as being evil. More specifically, if God does not exist, there is no ultimate basis to judge the crimes of Hitler. Seen in this light, the reality of evil actually requires the existence of God, rather than disproving it.[13]

See also

External links

Notes