Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Christopher A. Lee <calee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 09:15:24 -0500
On 20 Mar 2006 06:13:56 -0800, "Ron Peterson" <ron@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Paul Holbach wrote:
Simply because if there were any sound theistic arguments, we atheists
would be morally obliged to renounce atheism and become theists.
Hypothetically, suppose a theist agrees that he has no evidence that
there is a god but says that his religion is good because the true
followers of his religion don't go around murdering people or having
sex outside of marriage. The theist immediately has the upper hand
because simply having the belief that there isn't a god doesn't imply
one has any moral values.
Hardly. It's a non-sequitur, and the correct response is to point out
all his co-religionists who have done just that.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Ron Peterson
- Re: The logic of atheism
- References:
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Christopher A . Lee
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Paul Holbach
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Christopher A . Lee
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Paul Holbach
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Christopher A . Lee
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Paul Holbach
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Christopher A . Lee
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Paul Holbach
- Re: The logic of atheism
- From: Ron Peterson
- Re: The logic of atheism
- Prev by Date: Re: The logic of atheism
- Next by Date: Re: The logic of atheism
- Previous by thread: Re: The logic of atheism
- Next by thread: Re: The logic of atheism
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|