No, as an atheist you have no excuse but the one you've created to justify your inability to indulge in a little light murdering.
No, I meant exactly what I said. If you've no God, then you've only yourself to answer to, right or wrong.
As I posted, your first comment made no sense......thanks for restating it.
If you've no God, then you've only yourself to answer to, right or wrong.
You'd still have to answer to the rest of the society you belong to......and that is where an atheist will initially learn of acceptable behavior in regards to morality. Of course, mentally deficient/ill people will likely fail in those observations/lessons as the self over rides self control.
As shown, your logic fails.
The problem with the fundamentalist argument in this thread ( morality through faith ) is that it's subject to both rigid and blind obedience and
wholly dependent upon the individual's interpretations of the Bible.
This is where morality and blind obedience collide.
So your premise of 'only yourself to answer to' is actually applicable to the fundamentalist mindset.
A sensible person walks away with a valuable lesson from the Bible, a person of greed and arrogance walks away with the rationale to make excuses using God as his motive and authority.
GW Bush and his neocon advisers were a prime example of this type of abuse.
( and yeah....Ive heard the rebuttal that they aren't true believers.......and I've also heard the fundamentalist call them brothers in Christ in the next breath....quite hypocritical, imo )
The paths to moral understanding are obviously different, but it's the result we are debating.
The fundamentalist outlook in this thread is claiming that the concepts of good and evil can not be determined independent of faith.
As I have shown, the paths may be different, but an intelligent person can observe, be taught and learn.
And as shown....a claim of faith isn't guaranteed morality.
Myself, I have a belief in God, but my faith doesn't blind me to reality. I'm obviously not a fundamentalist
