So, If you are an atheist: where do you get your morals from?

Or if the only thing that might deter you is fear of punishment in this life or the afterlife.
Most feral niggers are religious. Have not heard one say he or she doesn't believe in god. Doesn't stop them from being wild beasts. Doesn't stop Muslims. Doesn't stop ever so devout spics.

I dont like it when I'm treated like shit so I dont treat other people like shit.
If you need a magic sky god to tell you not be an asshole you should be removed from this world.

The main difference between Atheists and Theists is Theists don't care if you're Atheist

>free gift of eternal life
>free gift
>free
If it's free, then I don't have to work for it by going to church. I can do exactly what I'm doing now and still get free eternal life, If such a thing exists

Common sense.

Obviously not from the people who don't condemn pedos among them or endorse the genital mutilation of infants.

>he thinks religion is about morality

>I dont treat other people like shit.
Why? What if it isn't in your interest to treat others nicely. What's illogical about getting what you want from people when you want?
>If you need a magic sky god to tell you not be an asshole you should be removed from this world.
If you need only empathy to tell you not be an asshole you should be removed from this world. Crime is what happens when personal interests override empahty.

you don't even have to ask for forgiveness in atheism you stupid fuck

The main difference between a terrorist and a bystander is that the terrorist doesn't care if you're a bystander.

If you're religious, where do you get yours from? Let's not forget that religious texts pretty much allow you to fuck over anyone who doesn't suck the same skygod cock as you do.

Attached: sip.jpg (956x711, 38K)

My fucking biological emotions same as you fucking idiot.

whats illogical about me killing someone if its in my interests to do so?

Does the ring not go around in the mind of the pious moron? So you would prefer to live within a society where people can kill if it's in ones best interest? Your actions within a society have a broader effect than you think, your way of thinking is very narrow-minded.

Attached: anger cat.png (544x572, 224K)

>I make them up myself
So like guns, its all good as long as this process isn't left in the wrong hands.

Make them up as I go.

Attached: Lesson.jpg (700x1688, 193K)

A muslim kills someone in the name of allah. If Allah is a real god then the muslim has a moral obligation to do the killing. ?

Well that's the biggest lie I've read all day.

Attached: 1522335067211.png (500x375, 396K)

I'd prefer they don't kill anyone. So religious people take their moral obligations from religious texts that make them kill people? Fuck that, doesn't sound right.

But you're good with them killing people as long as they follow a moral obligation from what's basically a Schrödinger's cat.

Attached: are you sure about that.jpg (581x494, 63K)

It requires a double standard wherein you have claim over their life, but not vice versa. Aggression violates the basic principles of consistency and noncontradiction, because it requires erecting different moral standards for different people.

>where do you get your morals from?
Not from bronze-age legends.

How do you know that those feelings indicate an action that is objectively right, as opposed to just a biological imperative? And would you say that all moral action comes from empathy?

nice try jew

>So you would prefer to live within a society where people can kill if it's in ones best interest
We already live in that society. People commit murder.

Why do I have an obligation not to act in my best interest. Why is it in my interests to act in the interests of a moral code? If there is no God then there is no point in acting morally as the only punishment is for your actions is only when you don't act within your best interests.

Can you objectively prove that I should care about the broader effects of a society. What is wrong about wanting to be selfish but not wanting anyone else to do so?

Such a shame;

>Shit tits

As opposed to primordial biological impulses?

No. The leaf is wrong.
Empathy is constantly used to justify evil. See: Communism

Right and wrong are rooted in the principle of self ownership, which is established through logic, not feels.

>claim over their life, but not vice versa
claims are irrelevent. What actually happens is only relevent. If someone has a claim over my life then so be it. What matters is not my claims but whether I can defend them

Well, common sense actually. Don't kill, don't steal, don't fuck your friend's wife - are all no-brainers. Then modern society invented laws to go by, the rest is history.

i feel like the decisions you make based off empathy would have logical implications of higher meaning of life and shit

...

>Where do you get your morals from?
The book of not being an overall piece of shit.

If I see a man raping I will kill him. Because it is in my best interests to make sure that people like this no longer exist.

Are you sure you are not Sweden?

>what happens matters
so, might makes right, which is the most morally defunked view imaginable
just because you can crush a baby's skull does not mean it is right to do so, brainlet.

Attached: 1522348309063.jpg (500x500, 56K)

So go out and rape and pillage and kill if it suits your moral code, but don't come crying to me when you're effectively normalizing viciousness within the society and someone comes and rapemurders you.

Well, I can tell you that it's the morally right thing to do, only a ape-IQ subhuman would not want what is the best for their fellow man and get the same in return.

So all I've seen here in the defense from team religious fucktards is that if it wasn't god's best buttbuddy threatening to buttfuck them for eternity if they act like shit, they'd totally rape and murder for their own benefit. You, religious scum, are degenerates.

Attached: mitä vittua.png (184x186, 59K)

How do you know those are objectively good laws? Common sense is a mental framework that is embedded due to evolution and cooperation strategies. That doesnt mean its objectively correct.

Evolution

You have your own moral system. When you compare it to any other moral system such as an Islamic one any discrepancies are inevitably seen as bad/immoral. From the perspective of the islamist you are immoral

you think youre being clever but youre just being a retard. try actually thinking

>So, If you are an atheist: where do you get your morals from?
A monkey! I mean a primate not a nigger despite most Ameritards acting like niggers

From the same place religions get it from - the minds of men based on individual and collective experience, and feelings of empathy for fellow humans, animals and pragmatic survival.

It's not illogical, only illegal. The fear of punishment is holding you back. Fear can be a source of morality ;)

Jews give nothing for free, user

> you're a le fedora XD
yeah sure

also I was answering the question of how morality is based in logic, not how one could prevent someone from behaving logically/immorrally. so good goalpost moving there.
Just because one can physically do something does not make it rational nor moral.

Attached: 1522324297369.gif (480x270, 751K)

Somehow that doesn't stop people from doing it. In fact the countries with nukes are the ones setting the rules.

>might makes right
there is no such thing as right without God. I can only act within my interests and that is the only morality that exists. If you call me immoral it doesn't mean anything to me because I don't understand any divine moral obligation to act in any particular way without god.

That's just an assertion, do you have any actual proof that that is what is the right thing to do?

And many people would actually do fucked up shit if there were no laws around. Religious morality is just a practical way to give people a reason to be moral, this is important because morality is a topic that I don't think anyone can really prove, everyone is relying on some sort of intuition. You can't objectively prove that being nice to people is good, you can say that it leads to a more peaceful outcome, or leads to more societal material benefits, but how do you prove those are good outcomes.

>So go out and rape and pillage and kill if it suits your moral code, but don't come crying to me when you're effectively normalizing viciousness within the society and someone comes and rapemurders you.
so it wouldn't be in my interest to do so? Oops shoud've thought that one through a bit better there pal

Universally preferable behaviour

According to protestantism yes. If you accept the sacrifice that Jesus did at the cross, then you are saved. But you have to believe in Him with all your heart. And for example, a serial killer that doesn't even repent of their acts can't truly accept Jesus, cause his acceptance wouldn't be real and honest.

You are not supposed to do good acts because you believe in God. Because you deep down know that your acts are good and they help us all in the end, you know that God exists and you want to do them. That's why I think God is a necessary being, since I deep down believe there are good and evil acts, regardless of human perception.

What a stupid quote. You can can say the same about being an atheist. You can essentially do whatever you want and blame it on human nature.

my point exactly

Not an argument

So you have the right to take a life because you've rationalized it? While I agree, the punishment on earth must be guaranteed for those who do evil onto others, if not just to keep the degenerates from acting upon their animalistic instinct by giving them something to lose, but for there is no guarantee of such in afterlife, but I believe in fair trial, but avenging others is not a virtue I will ever follow.

Yeah well they fuck goats and kids and can't read or write, so I don't really give a fuck about their perspective.

Attached: nispu.jpg (299x281, 16K)

realizing I dont want to get fucked with so I dont fuck with people. Its pretty standard survivalism desu

How simplified.

Atheists don't have morals that's the whole point.

They might have some natural virtue, but none of them are good people. Atheism is one of the ultimate sins. Far worse than murder.

once again, I was asked how to logically defend the statement "murder is wrong," not "how does society currently operate"

then you are merely claiming you cannot deduce what is right or wrong and can only be told it by a parental figure. Which means you would apparently think boiling children alive is a-OK so long as some goat fucker wrote it down on some animal skins a long time ago. I reject all of that. Each individual can know right from wrong. The method for doing so is reason.

>So you have the right to take a life
there is no such thing as right and wrong without a moral code.

atheist here

i am unsure about gods existance but i just follow the bible,dont steal murder yadda yadda

also you have to think about social cohesion and tribe mentality,if you go around raping kids then its ok for others to go around doing the same,would you want your daughter raped? no? then ergo you dont either

being a pedo is imoral anyway,even animals know this,a gorrila wont attack a small gorilla if it has a certain marking in its fur signifying its prepubescent.pedos are mentally ill due to this instrinct missing...they are damaged and should be shot.

>If only I wasn't an atheist, I could get away with anything. You'd just ask for forgiveness and then you'd be forgiven.
Sorry Keira, you might be retarded enough to fall for that, but God isn't.
An atheist doesn't even need forgiveness in their mind, because there is no one they are truly answerable to.

The media

>The method for doing so is reason

yeah did you not fucking see my original post that started this shit? literally replied to the post youre linking lmao

Attached: 1522322577509.png (478x523, 80K)

>So you have the right to take a life because you've rationalized it?
Right doesn't have anything to do with it. There are just things that I hate and I will eradicate them.

>but I believe in fair trial, but avenging others is not a virtue I will ever follow.
I live in Russia. Fair trial is something that happens here from time to time but in case you happen upon a crime in the process it is easier to deal with bastards at hand if you can. It is a much more reliable approach.

Common sense and the evolution of rule and law entrenched in our society.

Nowhere. I think things through and make up my own mind. Empathy plays a facttor. Asking myself "Would I like it if it was done to me?" "what are the consequences of my actions?". What makes sense sticks.

What is irrational about acting within my best interest? Answer: Nothing.

>once again, I was asked how to logically defend the statement "murder is wrong," not "how does society currently operate"
If you are saying you can't think of a situation where murder is the right thing to do I don't think you have enough brains to function without a father dictating to you a moral code.

Cause being nice to people is more beneficial for everyone.
It's the entire reason why we live in a society.

I'm not retarded so I don't need religion to tell me how to behave

I'm sure many people would, it's why we have those laws in place, because people are selfish fucks and no society will thrive without compassion, honesty and fairness to eachother. It's sad we have to be gated, but as you and I know, it's a must. To many, not even the threat of eternal fire or a life in prison will keep them from acting immorally.

Religious morality is a practical way to keep assholes from being assholes because you've told them they'll be thrown into a bonfire for eternity. You don't have to threaten me with that shit to keep me from going and fucking my neighbors wife.

Read the last sentences you wrote again, so acting good leading to peaceful and positive outcomes can't be proven to be the good outcome? Are you daft?

So you're an asshole, is what you're saying? Too bad, hope the threat of eternal buttfuckings will keep you from killing someone, you nigger.

And what moral code is there that says that? Guess what, your dusty old bible isn't the one who came up with moral code, retard.

So you're a violent being who will act upon intuition to cause more devastation. Eye for an eye and so forth? Maybe use concious reasoning a bit more before you act out on your violent desires.

This being said, I'm not defending rapists, I want them eradicated too, but there's got to be a better way than what you're suggesting. Unfortunately, world isn't perfect, it's not perfectly round and not perfectly just, so these things, as with the icon for justice, is a blind maiden with a scale, sometimes there's the lesser evil.

Attached: spröder.jpg (769x723, 33K)

Better that then letting an organization run by people that can be corrupted/immoral decide your morals for you.
>But muh sacred texts
Those are taught to you by your local priest/imam/rabbi and thus strained through their view of the texts/their morals.

>being nice to people is more beneficial for everyone
>everyone
what about the individual. If it isn't beneficial for the individual then what? There are plenty of examples when 'niceness' isn't beneficial for individual. For example immigration which you should know plenty about.
>I'm not retarded
>sweden
huh

how can a society function when everyone is stealing instead of creating

if every man in the country were gay how would we repopulate

>And what moral code is there that says that?
None. The absence of one
>your dusty old bible isn't the one who came up with moral code
I know.

>So you're a violent being who will act upon intuition to cause more devastation. Eye for an eye and so forth? Maybe use concious reasoning a bit more before you act out on your violent desires.
Rational reasoning is for when you have time and no pressing matters at hand. When shit goes down time becomes a luxury and you need to use simplified approaches if you want to get the results. People who start reasoning and mumbling when it is time to beat fuckers literally fail at natural selection.

A) You assume you know what your best interests are. You will only ever have a best guest. And I guarantee with a little thinking, you would realize that a live, free human is more useful than a dead or enslaved one. Unless you're a psycho, murdering someone would also wreck you forever. This makes self defense the only rational form of violence.
B) I'm not going to repeat myself. Actually grapple with my argument or don't, but don't keep moving the goalpost and then expect me to humor your idiocy.

The same place everyone who actually thinks for themselves does: where one's empathy and conceptual capacity meet.

But you claim that people who are not religious do not follow a moral code?

When is murder good, exactly? Oh, giant-brained paragon of moral understanding?

Yeah, in the long run it's usually more beneficial to be a decent person ant not act out on primal instincs which OP seems to imply
That's the reason why most psychopaths have to keep moving from place to place once people start catching on to their manipulative behaviour

>Actually grapple with my argument or don't
I'm not searching the thread for your stupid argument either link it again or I won't respond
>You assume you know what your best interests are
I agree. But whether you know or not your best interests doesn't mean you should follow a moral code

muslims dont care if im atheist?

i honestly dont give a shit about what you believe,and i dont think atheist on pol really care either

No, they may follow a moral code but there is no reason to do so

From mind and philosophy like it should be.

As I said if you can't think of a situation like this you do need a moral code dictated from above.

Mostly I just ask myself "What would Keira Knightley do?"
Then do the opposite.

it's like the second or third reply to your question, you blind faggot