Re: Fw: Alliance for Science

At 09:30 PM 3/11/2006, Matt \"Fritz\" Bergin wrote:
>Morality isn't just the laws of the land. There are things that are
>considered immoral that aren't against the law. I don't kill or
>steal because its wrong not becuase I will be punished for it by
>society. People break laws and cause war and death because that's human nature.
>
>Whats the difference between saying that there is no absolute truth
>and that we can't know what it is? The outcome is the same...and are
>you saying that your statement is an absolute truth that we do know?
>or don't we know that either? We are still faced with the same problem.
>
>I really don't think that atheists and christians have the same
>reasons for being moral. Sure we obey the laws because we agree to
>keep the laws as part of being citizens. I would be willing to guess
>that most Christians want to follow in the footsteps of Jesus for
>reasons that don't include not wanting to be punished by society.
>I'm saying that atheists have no reaon at all to be moral and no
>reason to tell other people to do the same. I'm not saying that
>there aren't atheists that aren't good people or that follow the
>law. There are atheists now that are moral because they were raised
>that way in a society that is influenced by religion (an observation
>by my atheist prof.). What about people and societies in an atheist
>future that will be raised on the idea that there are no morals or
>absolute truth or that their existance is just an illusion and that
>other people are just a clump of molecules and electrical and
>chemical signals? You can't really say otherwise if you only use
>science to look at the world or people.
>
>I'm very weary of the atheists that say religion is the cause of
>every problem (Dawkins), that morality is just an illiusion created
>by our genes (Ruse), that people are just a buch of molecules and
>signals that create an illusion of existance (Crick), ect. I don't
>know about you but I don't want anyone who thinks that morality is a
>genetic illusion working on anything that has to do with
>experimenting with human DNA. Maybe I just don't have enough
>experience in genetics and DNA but I can't help but think of the
>horrors that humanity could create with this also. Science can be
>used for great good...but if we destroy any idea of morality where
>is that going to lead science in the future?
>
>~Matt

@ You can't write enough laws to restrain the lawless - those who
are a law unto themselves and don't follow an absolute, objective,
impartial standard of right and wrong.

"We have no government armed in power capable of contending with
human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution
was written for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate
for the government of any other." ~ John
Adams http://www.freerepublic.com/~matchettpi/

~ Janice ... America's government is set up based upon the Biblical
worldview - that man is not "basically" good. The other religion is
based on the Arminian worldview that man is basically good and is
perfectable here and now. Eve was the first to call the shots in
that religion. I hear that she had a "sweet, kind" disposition, though. :)
Received on Sat Mar 11 21:55:35 2006