Morals from a non-relgious point of view is completely about rationalism and quickly become extreme. Without religion man=just another type of animal. If you value life but not a God then you should be defending farm animals with your life, chain yourselves to a tree for the sake of a few trees, kill humans who eat a lot of meat because it saves lives, that sort of thing

Also that hotness stuff is rubbish, not all ugly people marry alcoholics

Let's not get ahead of ourselves: if we were any "higher" than animals we wouldn't do most of the things we do. We just happened to be more intelligent. I don't see why any God would tell us otherwise.

As for love, I think you got the point.

In regards to your first point, I'm not sure what you mean
2ndly regarding love, you've also made the mistake of turning a 'why' question into a 'how' question

No, it doesn't. It is not even the subject of science.

Reasons like why are teleological, answering them in a mechanistic manner is a category mistake.

It is possible to argue it is all coincidence, of course, but that is not more scientific than saying there is purpose. The fallacious hidden argument in saying it is the only scientific explanation is that one then claims there can be no goal if there are mechanistic processes. However, the processes can be set up by an intelligent being with a goal, as in a factory, for instance.

There are clearly differences between a factory and the universe, but that is irrelevant (because that is not the point of the metaphor). The point is that there can be mechanisms alongside a meaning.



Actually, we are very different from other animals in the sense we have morality, intelligence, self-consciousness, arts and religion. While very primitive forms of these are found in other creatures, except religion, but the divergence is nevertheless remarkable. I personally think that the difference is big enough to allow dualism in humans.

That we do things we shouldn't do could (in my eyes better) be explained by total depravity. Ironically, we also differ in that from animals, whose incentives for killing are usually food and sex (and thus power, becoming the alpha male).

Oh yes, and what great progress religion has brought us, truly it is what seperates us from the animals.

Can't imagine animals burning people at the stake or nailing them to crosses. Nope, nope, they're too primitive for that.

For that matter, killing millions of their own species because they had a different opinion on what made stuff happen.
Oh yeah, and suicide bombing large structures that are important to them because "God" told them to.a

Well religion is a good way of raising an army, heck that's what Mohammad did (that's right kiddies, Mohammad was a radical).

Also you're going on about how religion is bad, look at North Korea, the government kills anyone there who believes in a God. It can go either way.

Also burning at the stake and crucifixion were methods of dealing with crime. Animals don't have an outline of morals so they can't break the rules so they can't get punished.

Pretty sure that's Muslims buddy, completely different.

What are you talking about?

Whoops, didn't see the extra page, I was replying to TID's suicide bombing thing.

...Did you seriously just relate MUSLIMS, a RELIGION, and suicide bombers? This topic is for posting religion, not slanderous stereotypes. I just happen to be muslim.

Sorry, I kinda meant the whole 9/11 thing.

That was Islamist extremists.
Get rid of your stereotypes before you come in here and offend a bunch of people.

Sorry, I only think what i've heard.

Then do your research before saying such things.