I reckon Neutral has a thing for me, because he always has the urge to relate to me as a person rather than my arguments - and even when he isn't talking to me! Well, hopefully he'll read this because then he'll know that I was in fact a Christian when I came to PF, but it because of the aggressive and intellectually stifling character of people like Neutral that I slowly became an apatheist and lost my faith in God. So in that sense I owe Neutral a thank you for pushing me to the logical conclusion of my my inquiries. I thought I should mention this just to defend myself as being someone who was, at least in my opinion, incredibly sincere about his beliefs for his duration of holding and expressing his thoughts with people like on PF, and I like to think I still am.
Originally Posted by Neutral
As for the immorality of sex outside of marriage, it is not simply enough for the religious to say a religious text condemns it. They need to show objectively and with logical foundation, that it is wrong. Even if God says it is wrong they need to show why he is right to the point that can easily show non-theists that this position is correct. This goes for religion generally of course. Its fine to say God's morality, as he instructs, is the best, but you need to show why and simply saiyng 'because it came from God' or 'because God said so' is no basis for logical observation and explanation - it is just a simple appeal to authority, ie a logical fallacy.
Last edited by MegadethFan; Feb 14 2012 at 06:32 PM.
I'm willing to change my position at any time on any issue. I have done so in the past. All you need is a logical, provable case, and I'm all in. The question is, have you got what it takes?
Oh, and just so you're not confused, I'm an apatheist libertarian.
"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." --Noam Chomsky