Movies and survival of the fittest

I watched Hotel Rwanda recently and was shocked by the mixed message we here from this and movies like it. The movie tells of the ethnic cleansing/genocide or what atheists/evolutionary believers would call survival of the fittest that took place in Rwanda during the early 90s.

People seem surprised by things like this as they happen over and over through history. There really only seem to be two different explanations. Either the Christians are right and God is real, believe He created us and these actions are objectively wrong because God has spoken and declared them to be in His word or we are simply the products of random and amoral actions over time and there is no basis for calling anything wrong. It could further be said that "survival of the fittest" would more likely mean these actions are right if we were able to meaningfully claim such a category for discussion within our worldview.

Atheist, believer in evolution - don't fret even if you are one day the object/victim of genocide like these 1,000,000 Rwandans, you can take comfort in making your contribution to the random meaningless progression of life on earth!

Pragmatism = The Atheist's moral compass!

Pragmatism, defined by me as "whatever works is right", is truly the atheist's moral compass. From the family, to education, to the highest levels of politics, pragmatism is how "right" and "wrong" must be determined. Of course the person with the most power or the "experts" they hire get to decide what the desired goal is and what "whatever works" looks like in the situation at hand. In the end, it is might that makes right. Of course their is no moral basis for accusing others of wrong as long as they can say this is what works.

Whatever works for ME is "right" - if I want to be a logical and consistent atheist!

Have you wiped out a weaker species today?

Survival of the fittest is at the very root of atheistic understandings of life. If you are not eliminating weaker species - you are not being consistent to your beliefs! The Christian's won't do this for you, so go conquer the weak or don't be surprised if the Fiddler Crabs or Humming Birds rise up and wipe you out one day!

Is eating your children only a legal issue?

If not for laws making it illegal, atheists should be consistent and affirm eating your children is as acceptable as eating any other living things. You might claim we should protect all animal life or you may have some standard by which you decide which animals are expendable for food or other reasons (crop harming insects for instance) and which are too advanced (able to feel) or just too "cute" to kill or consume.

I would propose that it is impossible to live in our culture without killing some animals for some reasons. If it is OK to kill a chicken and eat it, then why not a child? You might say you are exempt form this reasoning because you are a vegetarian and would never advocate killing/eating a chicken, but are you really being consistent in your treatment of animals? Do you kill insects that invade your home, bacteria that invade your body or cause the death of animals through your part in polluting the environment? Are some kinds of life of greater or lesser value - says who?

As one famous animal rights expert put it -

"There’s no rational basis for saying that a human being has special rights. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy. They’re all animals.” — Ingrid Newkirk, Washingtonian magazine, Aug 1986

Newkirk was trying to make a case for animal rights by suggesting we have just as much reason for protecting the rights of rats as children. She has a point, but unless their is some absolute moral standard from which we derive things like rights then she may be making the opposite point - if we have no basis for rights for rats then there is no basis for rights for people either.

Unless God has spoken, as the Christians claim, then any distinction between mammals and bacteria as worthy of rights is completely arbitrary. If you are to be totally true to an atheistic/evolutionary worldview, it would be wrong to distinguish even plant life or rocks from the sphere of rights as they all equally exist as products of the amoral process of time and chance acting on matter. Of course the rights they have is not the right to exist without being harmed, but the right or even obligation to consume each other as much as they are able as part of the evolutionary process.

If God has not spoken and given us specific information on morality as it relates to the world, then there is no basis for even having such discussions of "rights". Survival of the fittest must prevail and if it were legal to eat your children, no one could make any kind of moral argument regarding the rightness or wrongness of it.

If atheists were to act more like atheists and less like Christians (living like morals were real/absolute) we may not have survived long enough as a species to have these kinds of discussion (our parents may have eaten us), but do you want to be a consistent atheist or live?





.

Why "Good without God" is Silly Talk!

First, to talk about moral categories like good and bad makes no sense for atheists. If mankind is just another organism that came about through the amoral process of time and chance acting on matter, then to talk about things as good or bad is just plain silly. Chemical reactions or the actions of biological units brought about through chemical reactions are have no basis for morals.

Even if you were to suggest some other method for deciding certain things are good or bad, such as: they are good for the survival of the species or even the individual, your evaluation could never be anything but pure subjectivity. If we are the standard for deciding if we are good, I suspect we will be good in our eyes and someone else may just as validly declare us bad. Further, even the notion that the survival of an individual, a species, or even the continued existence of the earth as a whole is in some way "good", can't be grounded in anything besides personal opinion.

It is fascinating how many atheists feel obligated (in their books/speeches) to point out the better things atheists have done and the worse things religious people have done throughout world history. Should I assume they would become Christians if the statistics supported the opposite being true? Have they forgotten Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong-il and so many other murderous tyrants who were true to their atheistic/evolutionary beliefs? It has been suggested that some of these tyrants practiced a religion of sorts, but in practice they all assumed the role of god and acted according to an atheist/evolutionary worldview.

Likewise, this is an especially weak argument against Christianity since even though many who have called themselves Christians have done horrible things, the teachings of the Christian's Bible would have condemned those who did them and exposed them as not being Christians in any true biblical sense.

Clearly the tyrants who have been most successful in subduing/eliminating their foes were acting consistent with their atheist beliefs as they put survival of the fittest into action.

Face the facts - to even suggest life ought to continue is a moral statement that has no place in atheistic/evolutionary thinking.

Unless God speaks in some tangible way, such as the Bible as the Christians claim, then we have no basis for acknowledging morality as a category of thought/discussion, no language to speak within the category even if it existed and no standard we could use to evaluate it regardless.

So even if someone writes a book to the contrary - Good Without God - is silly talk.

Atheists do believe in god!

Really, if there is no God who has spoken or revealed Himself (as the Christians claim He has in the Bible), then I am as much of a god as there is and I can rule over those around me unless they can stop me, of course you can do the same back. This is what all great tyrants of history have believed and what you must embrace as you dethrone their God and put yourself in His place!

You could look into their claims about God as revealed in the Bible. They claim it is largely verifiable by outside archaeological evidence. They claim that it alone explains the world and even gives a basis for moral absolutes like kindness, justice and striving for peace. They claim that those who died martyrs for their faith in Jesus would never have given their lives for proclaiming the resurrection and His miracles if they knew it were all lies. However, we must remember, even if it is at times easier to believe their explanation of things than to attribute it all to time and chance acting on matter. If you accept their view you must step down form being god and worship theirs.

Imagine a world were we don't get to be god, would you really want that?

Oh the shame I feel!

I really let myself down today. I don't know what got into me, it was a moment of weakness, I just forgot my beliefs, lost sight of reality for a moment - maybe some leftover parental/society programed "conscience" made me do it, but I did it none the less and I feel like such a loser.

Yes, you guessed it, I did something sacrificial, I helped someone in need!

It makes no sense, I could almost wish I had someone to forgive such a "sin" against my atheistic and evolutionary beliefs! 

Although I definitely/rightly want what is best for me even at the expense of others most of the time...

it is sometimes like the selfish acts I know I should do I feel guilty for doing and at the same time the generous acts that make no sense in my worldview I sometimes feel good about doing!

I could almost curse the random action of time and chance on matter that saddled us with feelings that sometimes contradict our evolutionary obligation to selfish actions!!!

I know there are atheists that are generous/sacrificial and feel good about it, but let's face it y'all are traitors and are living like Christians, they are the only ones who can make a claim for the rightness of and even necessity to help the less fortunate. If God has not spoken and told us what we are expected to do, what right and wrong are, then we are obligated to assume "might makes right" as atheism and evolution demand.

I know what you may be thinking - it looks like the only way to have a society that is built on kindness, generosity, fairness, justice, etc, is by accepting the Christian's worldview.

You are right, but the freedom to do whatever you want and freedom from any guilt - comes at a cost!