MrDarwin

I think it's easy to forget sometimes--especially after spending too much time at IIDB--that Christians are people too, that they come in all flavors, and not all of them are just as bad as the devil they believe in. I found this story rather refreshing (emphasis added):

Foot Locker settles bias suit

Lest you get the wrong idea, here's a little more detail from an earlier story:

Hazel-rah

There is absolutely no doubt that there are plenty of Christians who behave in an ethical and courageous manner. But...
Why did it take an imaginary sky daddy to move her to help, if the man's anguish was so apparent? And as her actions were, in fact, ethical and courageous, why can't she take credit for them?

And it begs the question, of course, of what religion the offending manager was. I'm going to guess -- based entirely on statistics but I could be wrong -- that he wasn't atheist. How can two people follow the same religion and, theoretically, the same moral code, and yet treat people in such vastly different ways?

luvluv

Hazel-Rah:

Does it matter?

Happens among atheists all the time, though, doesn't it?

jmem

Well, only in that it's a little sad that it was clearly her own empathy and compassion that were speaking to her, and she can't even give herself credit for that. Regardless, I applaud her for her actions and I do find the story encouraging and refreshing. If only all Christians were like that maybe we wouldn't have so many gripes about Christianity.

Photon

If so, luvluv, please describe
(a) what specifically makes atheism a religion?
(b) what is the moral code that is officially adopted by atheists?

I'm hoping that was a joke, for you don't have any evidence for your claim - you are committing a category error, or you don't know what atheism is. After 2000+ posts, I find the latter hard to believe though.

luvluv

I'm a Christian, and on occassions when I feel the Holy Spirit is trying to persuade me to engage in some trying moral course of action, the fact that it's my own empathy and compassion that are speaking to me is not evident at all. And pardon my skepticism, but if it's not clear to me (or this lady) I don't see how it could be clear to you.

Photon:

I was speaking broadly. Point being, there are atheists with roughly the same metaphysical view (naturalism, materialism, what have you) who both believe in objective morality and yet disagree on specific moral issues. In the case above, it need not even be the case that the store owner and the customer have different beliefs, only that one was behaving according to those beliefs and one was not. This, too, happens among atheists as well as the religious. We all occasionally fail to be the people we'd like to be.

Biff the unclean

Odd though, that the Holy Ghost should suddenly go against the sacred scripture of God that lays out God's unchanging plan for man and tell this woman to act like a humanist towards this abomination of a vile sodomite sales clerk.

This lady is a decent person in spite of her religion and not because of it. She might give credit to God for her actions but there is nothing in God's word to support them

jmem

It is clear to me, and to all other atheists, because we believe that the Holy Spirit is imaginary. You asked an atheist what difference it makes. To us that is a huge difference. I think it's tragic when an imaginary friend gets credit for something that a real live human being does. Especially when said imaginary friend is widely used to support the very homophobia that inspired the discrimination in the first place!

We don't have a book that tells us what to do or how to act. It's natural that we disagree because we each have to figure things out for ourselves. Your book, your authority, on the other hand gets downright nitpicky in its instructions, and the problem is not that "one was behaving according to those beliefs and one was not". The problem is that your guide, that is supposed to have all the answers, is so unclear and contradicts itself so badly that both those who discriminate against homosexuals and those who defend them can firmly believe they are doing the right thing according to the Bible.

luvluv

Well, I suppose it's clear that you believe the Holy Spirit is imaginary, but it's not at all clear that the Holy Spirit is imaginary, particularly to people who believe they have experienced His work.

But you think that if you did, you'd not only all agree on all moral issues at all times, but that you'd perfectly adhere to those issues?

At any rate, there are atheists who ascribe to a moral theory outlilned explicitly in books (Randian Objectivists, for example, who take her The Virtue of Selfishness as gospel) who nonetheless disagree on moral issues.

Probably all this means is that moral issues are tricky, and that there is no moral calculus sufficient to ensure that all human beings who follow it all come to the same conclusions all of the time.

Ponzi

I don't get it. This woman decided to do the right thing. What does it matter if she thought it was God telling her to do it rather than her own conscience? Sure, you can point out how internally inconsistant Christian theology may be, but I don't think it's hard to cobble together a version where all the old testament brutality is overturned by Jesus.