Sephiroth

Yes it is. Instead of cooking that little pea-sized brain, why don't you read some good ole' Plato? Your morality is currently in the friggin' Copper Age.

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: Sephiroth ]</p>

bonduca

Helen, Media apparently is another one of those who think atheists are amoral monsters or that morality as well as humanity come only from (his version of)God.

He appears to be the sort who thinks it's acceptable to treat us as subhumans.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Media: In its most basic form, probably. This is really an oversimplistic idea that the development of human morality is fundamentally based on survival. However, I do think that's what it boils down to. People with a good system of morals survived, and people with a bad system of morals did not. The people with a good system of morals taught their children these morals, and the next generation survived as a result. I think other traits of morality (for example, lying) that are not necessary to survival get passed along with the morals essential to survival. The people who didn't kill their children may have also thought lying was bad. Thus, they lived to teach their children that lying is wrong. It can all be traced back to survival, but I think there is more to morality than a basic survival mechanism.

As Illithid said, it is an emotional reaction. From birth you were exposed to the morals of your parents, and of society. As time went on, you adopted these morals as your own, and changed them as your experience in life changed. You don't consciously think this everytime you make a moral decision; it comes naturally. So of course you didn't get angry because you were concerned for the future of human survival; you were angry because this woman's act went against the very system of morals you hold dear to you.

-Nick

The Other Michael

Hi Alli,

No, murder 1 requires, as I understand it, actual malice and intent.

This sounds like manslaughter to me. I doubt the lady had any malicious intentions towards her kids (though she could of) - she just didn't think.

So through her negligence she caused the deaths, but that shouldn't bring it to the point of deliberately murdering her children.

cheers,
Michael

One of the last sane

Even if she had done this thing on a mild temperate day, and the kids had lived physically unharmed, leaving small kids alone in a car for hours is still a cruel way to treat them. I understand dying of heat stress is a very horrible way to go. Hope they lock the stupid bitch up until she is too old to breed again.

Media-1, human society survives and holds together because of basic traits of altruism, compassion, empathy, which have absolutely nothing to do with which religion is practiced, or whether any religion is practiced. Get over it.

rebelnerd

I believe Alli was referring to the article, the Police Chief says he is going for Murder 1 in the second sentence.

Filo

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: Filo Quiggens ]</p>

Dr Rick

Try to imagine our bewilderment as human beings that anyone can believe in and worship a loving sky-daddy who allows such horrible events to occur.

Rick

Media-1

What is the alternative? A sky-daddy that makes robots and then controls every act that they can (and can't) do? We humans are capable of understanding "good" and "evil" only because both good and evil actually exist.

Media-1

Media-1

I hope I wasn't treating you, or anybody as subhumans. I'm giving all of you the credit for having intelligent opinions. That's what makes this forum so much fun.

The anthropology explanation is very unsatisfying as an explanation for why this woman provokes such anger in us. I think we're angered by the fact that the woman did something horribly wrong in this specific case, not because we are generally quite concerned about human survival.

In fact, if it is true that societies that develop the "right" moral values are the ones most likely to survive, then atheists might unintentionally be providing terrorists with a rationale for killing Americans, who they consider "the great Satan" largely because of their fundamentalist view regarding American morality. They could attempt to justify a Muslim holy war against us simply because we're embracing the "wrong" moral values. There are some rather unpleasant consequences that necessarily follow this anthropology theory.

Media-1

Autonemesis

This sounds exactly like what people commonly call "moral relativism". If you cannot determine in advance what God would do, how can you claim his morality is any sort of absolute guide?

And besides, I would argue that you are not the furthest thing from a diety, since unlike a dog, or an ant, or a bacterium, you can at least conceive of the idea of one.

HTH. HAND.