that show disgusts me. just a bunch of dumb homophobic rednecks

My dad is convinced that Duck Dynasty is real. It is the most obvious scripted show I have ever seen.

DobberMy dad is convinced that Duck Dynasty is real. It is the most obvious scripted show I have ever seen.

hahaha your dad is alone in this country. Plenty of people think that scripted BS is the real deal. It may be based on reality, but it is scripted to the T

i mean, what he said is basically true. if a person is an atheist, then they don't believe in facing judgement in the "afterlife"?

*disclaimer - i couldn't give the slightest fuck about religion or anything Phil Robertson has to say. Just not surprised this came out of his mouth....he's an old, sourthern, religious, nutbag that obviously believes that the only "right and wrong" that exists is that as defined by the bible.

Your moral capacity should come from within, not be spoon fed to you by a religious ideology. It is perfectly reasonable for an atheist to be a moral person without a belief in god. Making moral moral decisions based on some fear of judgment from god is not acting moral at all. You're just appealing to whatever your ideology taught you to do. A truly moral person doesn't need this influence to make moral decisions.

Sorry been taking this bioethics class and its #deeeeeep bro

Piste.OffYour moral capacity should come from within, not be spoon fed to you by a religious ideology. It is perfectly reasonable for an atheist to be a moral person without a belief in god. Making moral moral decisions based on some fear of judgment from god is not acting moral at all. You're just appealing to whatever your ideology taught you to do. A truly moral person doesn't need this influence to make moral decisions.

/thread

Piste.OffYour moral capacity should come from within, not be spoon fed to you by a religious ideology. It is perfectly reasonable for an atheist to be a moral person without a belief in god. Making moral moral decisions based on some fear of judgment from god is not acting moral at all. You're just appealing to whatever your ideology taught you to do. A truly moral person doesn't need this influence to make moral decisions.

Sorry been taking this bioethics class and its #deeeeeep bro

My morals from within say that rape and murder is okay. Is that okay? Its my morals.

Left_BrothersMy morals from within say that rape and murder is okay. Is that okay? Its my morals.

Never said just because your morals come from within that makes them automatically right. However the majority of people don't need a religious ideology to tell them that rape and murder is wrong.

Piste.OffNever said just because your morals come from within that makes them automatically right. However the majority of people don't need a religious ideology to tell them that rape and murder is wrong.

Ya, I agree. But where does right and wrong come from, what makes your morals more right than mine.

Left_BrothersYa, I agree. But where does right and wrong come from, what makes your morals more right than mine.

Because I don't want anybody raping me or anybody in my family. So, I will not rape. I do not want my shit stolen, so I do not steal. If your morals are fucked then there will be consequences (ideally).

louie.miragsBecause I don't want anybody raping me or anybody in my family. So, I will not rape. I do not want my shit stolen, so I do not steal. If your morals are fucked then there will be consequences (ideally).

That is not really what I was asking, you basically just stated what is best for you.

Left_BrothersYa, I agree. But where does right and wrong come from, what makes your morals more right than mine.

Society. The social norm is the determining factor of 'right' and 'wrong'.

INB4 frenchy comes onto this thread defending his actions

DrailSociety. The social norm is the determining factor of 'right' and 'wrong'.

What if a society says that murder is okay?

Left_BrothersWhat if a society says that murder is okay?

Then I'll mow you like a lawn

Left_BrothersWhat if a society says that murder is okay?

Throughout history, some societies have, and will. Off the top of my head, euthanasia is an example. Some societies are down, others aren't. The act is looked at as a kind gesture or murder, depending on what region of the world you are in.

Left_BrothersWhat if a society says that murder is okay?

Cmon man, using hypotheticals in an argument is weak. Thats really all you got? Lol

DrailThroughout history, some societies have, and will. Off the top of my head, euthanasia is an example. Some societies are down, others aren't. The act is looked at as a kind gesture or murder, depending on what region of the world you are in.

Okay, then who is right? It is like you saying x=2 and I say x=3, only one of us can be right.

But honestly when you get down to it aren't morals just what we do only in interest of ourselves? Don't murder because their would be reprucussions, help others, so you get to heaven.....morals are really just self preservation.

Left_BrothersOkay, then who is right? It is like you saying x=2 and I say x=3, only one of us can be right.

We covered this already. Right/wrong is subjective. You can't really compare society to a math problem. There is no one single answer to the question (unlike math). Another example of this would be eating dogs or not. In North America you would be looked at as doing something wrong if you were to eat a dog, yet in parts of Asia (and even Mexico), it's normal practice.

Right and wrong are constantly changing, evolving, and as long as there are different societies, religions, and beliefs in the world, there will never be one answer.

UglyboyINB4 frenchy comes onto this thread defending his actions

came here 2 say this^

Left_BrothersThat is not really what I was asking, you basically just stated what is best for you.

you asked where people's rights and wrongs come from. They come from me not wanting to get shit stolen from me so I don't steal. That is where is comes from. My own reasoning

Left_BrothersWhat if a society says that murder is okay?

Then, it is ok obviously. It past societies murder was ok. In our society murder is OK. We murder inmates. We also kill "insurgents" (and civilians) in the middle east

Left_BrothersOkay, then who is right? It is like you saying x=2 and I say x=3, only one of us can be right.

No. It is not like saying that at all.

Man created God.

Man created language.

Man invented words.

Man invented the word moral.

Man gave it meaning.

Hopefully this clears things up...

Left_BrothersYa, I agree. But where does right and wrong come from, what makes your morals more right than mine.

That's the question every philosopher ever has attempted to answer. The Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas would say there is a natural law derived from a divine law that is intrinsic to all humans because were made in that divine image. Other philosophers have proposed that our actions come from an intrinsic duty of moral good or that we have a specific purpose in life and we can only carry out that purpose through moral actions. So you can answer your question in a billion different ways.

What I think is the flaw in many modern day religious followers like the duck dynasty guy is that their justification of their actions is to do good to get to go to heaven and to do good is to do whatever the bible or god says and since god and Jesus are moral by doing what they say makes me moral too. This is a false sense of pat yourself on the back morality I think. Their actions are not intrinsically moral in of themselves. They are under the guise of acting morally to get go to heaven. What determines your intrinsic sense of morality is obviously up to vast interpretation. Just my thoughts.

.Hugo.Cmon man, using hypotheticals in an argument is weak. Thats really all you got? Lol

That's not really that hypothetical. Public, gruesome executions are completely acceptable in many countries, as is "mob justice". I wouldn't consider those socially right though.

shocker611That's not really that hypothetical. Public, gruesome executions are completely acceptable in many countries, as is "mob justice". I wouldn't consider those socially right though.

it wont let me paste it in here but look up the definition of murder. I would say those dont fall under that

Piste.OffThat's the question every philosopher ever has attempted to answer. The Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas would say there is a natural law derived from a divine law that is intrinsic to all humans because were made in that divine image. Other philosophers have proposed that our actions come from an intrinsic duty of moral good or that we have a specific purpose in life and we can only carry out that purpose through moral actions. So you can answer your question in a billion different ways.

What I think is the flaw in many modern day religious followers like the duck dynasty guy is that their justification of their actions is to do good to get to go to heaven and to do good is to do whatever the bible or god says and since god and Jesus are moral by doing what they say makes me moral too. This is a false sense of pat yourself on the back morality I think. Their actions are not intrinsically moral in of themselves. They are under the guise of acting morally to get go to heaven. What determines your intrinsic sense of morality is obviously up to vast interpretation. Just my thoughts.

I think that is a misconstrued and pretty basic understanding of why Christians (I can't speak for other religions) follow the moral patterns they do. Those who are devout in their belief (regardless of where they are on the fundamentalist spectrum), believe that they have a relationship with God. They behave in a certain way to please God because that's what you do with someone you love and have a relationship with (ie - parents, family, friends, significant other, etc). You act a certain way and do things for those people because you know it will make them happy and that in and of itself is enough.

Heaven may be a by-product of that behaviour, but it is rarely the sole motivation for one's belief and convictions.

I'm not hear to argue or convince you that it's logical to that or that it makes sense, but giving some insight.

I have a hard time taking atheists seriously when they act just as petty and insecure as the religions they dismiss.

Who gives a shit if some hick makes a living by mindlessly vomiting whatever controversial script is handed to him from the network?

lIllII have a hard time taking atheists seriously when they act just as petty and insecure as the religions they dismiss.

Who gives a shit if some hick makes a living by mindlessly vomiting whatever controversial script is handed to him from the network?

Because putting archaic fuckheads like the guy in question on a pedestal that is nation-wide television promotes ignorance and irrationality and hate-mongering, which can ultimately infect innocent, young, impressionable minds. Anyone can believe or think whatever they'd like - that is not the issue here. What is the issue is when these sorts of people can't just keep their beliefs and hatred to themselves - everyone must know about their bigoted, narrow-minded views. So, if you want this sort of backwards thinking to stop, you need to confront it, otherwise it will just run rampant and potentially grow

Okay, I have been trying to work you through my thought processes, but that failed miserably.

So the point I was trying to make is this, right and wrong is not relative. It is impossible for one society to say something (like murder) is wrong and then another say it is right. It is impossible, because truth cannot contradict truth. One society's way of viewing things and another society's views cannot contradict each other, and both be correct. If there is only one possible truth and one set of morals then they all have to come from one place, in Phil s case a moral law giving God. He does go very overboard in saying that Atheist would be okay with rape and murder, I don't think that is true.

In the end I am not the best at explaining things, and we are all able to believe what we want.

las.Because putting archaic fuckheads like the guy in question on a pedestal that is nation-wide television promotes ignorance and irrationality and hate-mongering, which can ultimately infect innocent, young, impressionable minds. Anyone can believe or think whatever they'd like - that is not the issue here. What is the issue is when these sorts of people can't just keep their beliefs and hatred to themselves - everyone must know about their bigoted, narrow-minded views. So, if you want this sort of backwards thinking to stop, you need to confront it, otherwise it will just run rampant and potentially grow

Oh look, it's the age-old social decay argument that has never been anything more than a gussied-up way for people to do the exact same thing and pretend that they're somehow "above" it.

People like this will always exist; if not him then some other loudmouth. It's a very inefficient (and futile) philosophy to try to make your environment bend to your will because you couldn't be bothered to have a sense of agency in the first place. You can either use fear mongering to conjure some imaginary threat to children in a desperate attempt to have your biases validated, or you can teach your kids to be the master of their own destiny and not be stupid enough to give a fuck about what's happening on TV.

Wait a second - but then what would be bitch about? What cultural scapegoat would we have to impose blame for things that, at most, only annoy us?

Nevermind. Carry on...

Left_BrothersOkay, I have been trying to work you through my thought processes, but that failed miserably.

So the point I was trying to make is this, right and wrong is not relative. It is impossible for one society to say something (like murder) is wrong and then another say it is right. It is impossible, because truth cannot contradict truth. One society's way of viewing things and another society's views cannot contradict each other, and both be correct. If there is only one possible truth and one set of morals then they all have to come from one place, in Phil s case a moral law giving God. He does go very overboard in saying that Atheist would be okay with rape and murder, I don't think that is true.

In the end I am not the best at explaining things, and we are all able to believe what we want.

Like everything important in life - love, hate, money, God - morality is imaginary. It does not exist beyond the construct of civilization. That's not to say that it isn't real; what makes it real is our belief in it and nothing more.

It's like DuChamp's Fountain, which is a dadaist artwork that consists of nothing more than a urinal sitting atop a pedestal in a museum. The urinal is not physically, objectively, art. Art is not Newtonian. The fact that it sits in a museum and people pay $12 to see it is what makes it art. It exists solely in our treatment of it and nothing more. Money is the same way. It's just cloth with pictures of dead guys on it. Same with gold, which is equally as worthless since it isn't even a useful ore. It's purely instrumental - there's no inherent value.

Morality is the same way. It has a measurable benefit to society, yet only exists fluidly to superficially cater to our needs as a society that strives to be peaceful. It is both imaginary and real.

Piste.OffThat's the question every philosopher ever has attempted to answer. The Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas would say there is a natural law derived from a divine law that is intrinsic to all humans because were made in that divine image. Other philosophers have proposed that our actions come from an intrinsic duty of moral good or that we have a specific purpose in life and we can only carry out that purpose through moral actions. So you can answer your question in a billion different ways.

What I think is the flaw in many modern day religious followers like the duck dynasty guy is that their justification of their actions is to do good to get to go to heaven and to do good is to do whatever the bible or god says and since god and Jesus are moral by doing what they say makes me moral too. This is a false sense of pat yourself on the back morality I think. Their actions are not intrinsically moral in of themselves. They are under the guise of acting morally to get go to heaven. What determines your intrinsic sense of morality is obviously up to vast interpretation. Just my thoughts.

Because I can think of an omnipotent entity in my mind, It MUST exist both in the realm of logic and in reality because existing only in the realm of Logic would be contrary to being Omnipotent.

#Aquinas drops the Mic

Why do people even care what he says ir thinks? Live your fuckin life how you wanna live it. No redneck or self righteous liberal fuck should dictate how you do that. If this bothers you that much i feel sorry for your whiny ass

Left_BrothersOkay, I have been trying to work you through my thought processes, but that failed miserably.

So the point I was trying to make is this, right and wrong is not relative. It is impossible for one society to say something (like murder) is wrong and then another say it is right. It is impossible, because truth cannot contradict truth. One society's way of viewing things and another society's views cannot contradict each other, and both be correct. If there is only one possible truth and one set of morals then they all have to come from one place, in Phil s case a moral law giving God. He does go very overboard in saying that Atheist would be okay with rape and murder, I don't think that is true.

In the end I am not the best at explaining things, and we are all able to believe what we want.

There is not only one possible truth. That's the most outrageous thing I have ever heard.

las.Because putting archaic fuckheads like the guy in question on a pedestal that is nation-wide television promotes ignorance and irrationality and hate-mongering, which can ultimately infect innocent, young, impressionable minds. Anyone can believe or think whatever they'd like - that is not the issue here. What is the issue is when these sorts of people can't just keep their beliefs and hatred to themselves - everyone must know about their bigoted, narrow-minded views. So, if you want this sort of backwards thinking to stop, you need to confront it, otherwise it will just run rampant and potentially grow

amen. thats like saying "what's wrong with somebody running around calling people the n word?"

NickyTooramen. thats like saying "what's wrong with somebody running around calling people the n word?"

Right, because a bunch of upper-class white atheists getting upset that some irrelevent hick on TV disrespects their beliefs is totally similar to racial subjugation.

Oh wait, no it isn't.

The hick is just being a hick. Meanwhile you're all sinking to his level by giving a shit to begin with. What better way to breathe life into a bullshit opinion than to draw attention to it?

lIllIWhat better way to breathe life into a bullshit opinion than to draw attention to it?

yup.. same goes for hated celebs like Kim and Kayne. People hate them so much but never stop fucking talking about them. It is odd and then they wonder why she is so famous.

PoLaRpEaKThere is not only one possible truth. That's the most outrageous thing I have ever heard.

So what you are saying is there is not only one possible truth, but you statement is the only possible truth. That's the most outrageous thing I have ever heard.

Left_BrothersThat's the most outrageous thing I have ever heard.

There are many things way more outrageous than that

saskskierI think that is a misconstrued and pretty basic understanding of why Christians (I can't speak for other religions) follow the moral patterns they do. Those who are devout in their belief (regardless of where they are on the fundamentalist spectrum), believe that they have a relationship with God. They behave in a certain way to please God because that's what you do with someone you love and have a relationship with (ie - parents, family, friends, significant other, etc). You act a certain way and do things for those people because you know it will make them happy and that in and of itself is enough.

Heaven may be a by-product of that behaviour, but it is rarely the sole motivation for one's belief and convictions.

I'm not hear to argue or convince you that it's logical to that or that it makes sense, but giving some insight.

For sure I get you and I didn't want to generalize all Christians. For lots of people though I'd argue that their actions do not come from a loving relationship with God by trying to honestly please him. Clear hate and discrimination towards others, whether it be towards atheists, gay people, whatever, is does not come from that relationship. People who use their religion to discriminate are simply justify their hatred using a theological basis. That's exactly what the duck dynasty guy is doing. Unfortunately for Christianity, people like this also happen to be the most outspoken.

Someone famous said something stupid? Yawn. Might as well stop the tabloid presses.

#philfreefoiegras

As a rapist murderer i am deeply offended by these comments.

Piste.OffFor sure I get you and I didn't want to generalize all Christians. For lots of people though I'd argue that their actions do not come from a loving relationship with God by trying to honestly please him. Clear hate and discrimination towards others, whether it be towards atheists, gay people, whatever, is does not come from that relationship. People who use their religion to discriminate are simply justify their hatred using a theological basis. That's exactly what the duck dynasty guy is doing. Unfortunately for Christianity, people like this also happen to be the most outspoken.

Also if what he said was true every atheist would be a raping murdering psychopath. Since not all atheists rape and murder, and since some religious people do rape and murder, we can deduce that our sense of morality is not necessarily derived from faith.

Or you could make the argument that people that act morally but claim to be atheist aren't actually atheist they are just rejecting a certain brand of dogma that they don't agree with. Or that self described religious people that rape and murder are categorically atheist because if you actually believed in God you probably wouldn't be out raping and murdering.

He's a jackass. Morality doesn't come from what book you read or who you listen to on Sunday mornings, but from within.

I'm not some outright atheist (I take the scientific approach - I haven't seen enough evidence either way to give a definitive answer) but I still am very very against rape and murder. That's my own morality coming through and it has nothing to do with fear of judgement from some higher power...

Either way, screw him. Everyone know's he's crazy. Nobody watches that show anymore because of it. ho hum, nothing to see here, really...

Given the current status of America and the BS we see on a daily basis whether that be in politics, media,etc....I am always amazed why people hate on the Duck Dynasty people.

If you have read anything about htem...for the most part thats the way they actually are. Hard working, very family oriented, just good people with great morals on life. So they are open about religion...who cares. There is a LOT MORE people out there who deserve the hate.

KravtZGiven the current status of America and the BS we see on a daily basis whether that be in politics, media,etc....I am always amazed why people hate on the Duck Dynasty people.

If you have read anything about htem...for the most part thats the way they actually are. Hard working, very family oriented, just good people with great morals on life. So they are open about religion...who cares. There is a LOT MORE people out there who deserve the hate.

I tend to think that people who denounce a very large group of people as possible murderers and rapists warrant hate.