The Student Room Group

A question to all atheists

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Tawheed
Is a 25 year old son, who fully consents to engage in sexual activity with his 55 year old father, according to your idea of morality, acceptable?
Why don't we discuss things of real moral relevance? Such as why Islamic radicals entice adolescents to strap explosives to themselves and then walk into a crowded public building to blow themselves up and kill as many people as possible - all in the name of Allah?
Original post by FredOrJohn
You could go on and on for all religious books (bible, koran, vadas, tripitaka)


I apologise for attempting subtlety and will be more blunt.

You have made a mistake in English by interpreting the phrase, "question to all atheists," to mean, "clarification sought on the official stance of atheism." The OP was not seeking out how the question is answered by western atheism/secularism as you suggested, but is inviting all atheists to answer individually.

You then made a philosophical mistake by assuming that a societal influence is the same thing as a basis. Many people like to think that atheism is a monolithic philosophy like a religion. I can see that you're not among these people as you can separate the principle and hold the non-belief while being Roman Catholic. But you have asserted multiple times that atheism is a set of beliefs (rather than just one) with a single base which extends to a shared basis for morality.

This is not the case. Atheists may draw morality from science, logic, societal norms, survival instinct, protection of the society or herd, dogmatic adherence to Batman's Rules of Engagement, a 1950's economics textbook, or anything else they choose.

Modern Western atheism may have specific societal influences, but it is wrong to say that these are a basis, or even a cause. An individual human being may choose to believe there is no god for any number of reasons, and logic doesn't have to be in the mix. Said atheist (or even a religious person) may then choose to build their morality on any number of things, and you don't get a say as to whether or not it's a valid morality. You may, however, stand in judgement of that morality's value. Such judgement may be up to your own morality, logic, value system, religion, of philosophy. Or your views on Batman.

You do not get to say what conclusions atheists are allowed to draw from their study of anything, or even imply that their decision must be based on what you think it should be based on. (Literally you get to say it. But it doesn't carry any weight.)
Original post by Tawheed
Is a 25 year old son, who fully consents to engage in sexual activity with his 55 year old father, according to your idea of morality, acceptable?


We're not the ones promoting incest. Quran 4:23.
From the religion who promotes, yes encourages marriage and sexual relationships with family members. How rich.
Why dont I flip the question?
Why is it okay for muslims to have a sexual relationship with up to their first cousin? Cant be for social reasons right, nothing mentioned in the Quran about how if cousins are raised together then its wrong. Cant be genetic reasons as thats not mentioned either. Another rule set which wont be questioned, just accepted. What a shock, 1st cousins is fine but father and son. GOD FORBID!

Funny how you post this question to set an atheists,
1. We're all different and dont have a uniform belief structure.
2. Look at your own religion first.
3. You've done this thread before, you have only made it again because you're trying to prove a point in your ISOC thread. Oh look guys, atheists support incest.
4. Homosexuality isnt comparable to incest, I know you havent mentioned that but in a previous thread you posted the exact same question. Attempting to prove theyre the same.

Grow up.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Tawheed
Is a 25 year old son, who fully consents to engage in sexual activity with his 55 year old father, according to your idea of morality, acceptable?


Morals and religion are not codependent. There is no "atheist idea of morality" because being an atheist does not dictate your morals, or lack thereof, you do.

Why is this such a hard concept to understand? :facepalm:
Original post by acupofgreentea
Morals and religion are not codependent. There is no "atheist idea of morality" because being an atheist does not dictate your morals, or lack thereof, you do.

Why is this such a hard concept to understand? :facepalm:


It isn't. He understands it perfectly well, but he's cut from the same cloth as those clerics who themselves drew pictures of Muhammad in the likeness of a pig at the height of the Danish cartoon controversy and circulated them around the Muslim world to incite rioting and attacks on Western embassies.

Granted, he hasn't quite done that, but if you were in any doubt about what the purpose of this thread was: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3796875&page=242&highlight=&p=64769189#post64769189
(edited 7 years ago)
It has massive yuck factor.

But I don't entirely base my morals on yuck factors inbuilt into me by either genetic of environmental factors.

As long as it is consensual it is morally acceptable. Even if I find it personally repulsive :yucky:
I wouldn't say it's socially acceptable, but as long as they're not harming anyone.

No reason to stone them, or whatever some f'd up religion would do.
Original post by Tawheed
Is a 25 year old son, who fully consents to engage in sexual activity with his 55 year old father, according to your idea of morality, acceptable?

What's this got to do with Atheism?
Original post by Hydeman
It isn't. He understands it perfectly well, but he's cut from the same cloth as those clerics who themselves drew pictures of Muhammad in the likeness of a pig at the height of the Danish cartoon controversy and circulated them around the Muslim world to incite rioting and attacks on Western embassies.

Granted, he hasn't quite done that, but if you were in any doubt about what the purpose of this thread was: [url="http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3796875&page=242&highlight=&p=64769189#post64769189
I'm"]http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3796875&page=242&highlight=&p=64769189#post64769189I'm pretty sure he's a Daesh sympathiser and is manipulating sentiment to drive the vulnerable into a more orthodox and extreme Islam by misappropriating replies to his loaded statements.

A truly immoral and despicably duplicitous person who is playing everyone and cowardly hiding under the protection of the ISOC thread.
Original post by Hydeman
It isn't. He understands it perfectly well, but he's cut from the same cloth as those clerics who themselves drew pictures of Muhammad in the likeness of a pig at the height of the Danish cartoon controversy and circulated them around the Muslim world to incite rioting and attacks on Western embassies.

Granted, he hasn't quite done that, but if you were in any doubt about what the purpose of this thread was: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3796875&page=242&highlight=&p=64769189#post64769189


I have replied in that thread, to his post

Guys, atheists believe it is acceptable for a 25 year old consenting able and capable son to engage in sexual relationships with his own father, so long as they are both adults and both consent.

I'm not even kidding here, they believe it is morally acceptable.

Thread:
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3195447

thus:

Do you realise what you have just done? You have just claimed that atheists (with no qualification, therefore meaning all of them) support the morality of the homosexuality of an incestuous father and son, with the implication that they do so on the basis of their atheism.

It is, of course, nonsense, as anyone who follows the link you gave will find out. But that is not the problem you are now faced with.

Your problem, going forward, is that you have no longer have a valid argument against anyone that posts any old nonsense, claiming it is true of all Moslems. You can no longer claim that IS does not represent all Moslems. You have no valid argument against anyone that claims all Moslems support terrorism. because you have done the equivalent thing yourself.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 110
Avatar for RobML
RobML
6
I believe morality is ultimately nothing but an arbitrary social phenomenon. However, humans (arguably sentient life as a whole) have an extremely strong natural tendency to prefer pleasure over pain, and it is this preference to pleasure that serves as the best tangible foothold for a stable, universal system of morality that we could conceive of.

I personally subscribe to a teleological (things are defined by their ends) version of this "preference morality":
1. We have a natural tendency to prefer pleasure
3. Pleasure is pleasurable
3. More pleasure is preferable to less pleasure
4. A world with infinite pleasure is the most pleasurable world- this is the teleological end
5. The function of morality, therefore, is to guide us towards fufilling this best conceivable state of things. It's irrelevant whether it is practically possible or not.

(what is is implicit here is that without objective morality, it can only exist to serve us, so we must define the best way it can serve us)
Original post by Hydeman
It isn't. He understands it perfectly well, but he's cut from the same cloth as those clerics who themselves drew pictures of Muhammad in the likeness of a pig at the height of the Danish cartoon controversy and circulated them around the Muslim world to incite rioting and attacks on Western embassies.

Granted, he hasn't quite done that, but if you were in any doubt about what the purpose of this thread was: http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3796875&page=242&highlight=&p=64769189#post64769189


I believe Tawheed is actually a sister.
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
I believe Tawheed is actually a sister.


How very awkward. I could have sworn I've seen just about everyone refer to her as a male, with no objection from her. :s-smilie:
Original post by Hydeman
How very awkward. I could have sworn I've seen just about everyone refer to her as a male, with no objection from her. :s-smilie:


I can't even be sure any more because all of these genderless sign Islamic posters melt into one but the notion that she's female is in my head for some reason :lol:
Original post by Tawheed
Is a 25 year old son, who fully consents to engage in sexual activity with his 55 year old father, according to your idea of morality, acceptable?



Absolutely NOT!:wtf:
Original post by Cobalt_
X


All the OP was doing was asking a question? Simply seeing the views of those who claim to be atheists, and most replies are indeed criticizing Islam, when it's not even relevant.

Asking a simple and unambiguous question and in return get bombarded with insults to his beliefs...

For indeed, every chance available is somehow an opportunity to criticize Islam, or one interpretation of it, shall I say.

Never have I heard such drivel.
Judging by the genre of videos suggested to me under the "popular in your country", my country has no moral qualms with incest relations.
Original post by mil88
All the OP was doing was asking a question? Simply seeing the views of those who claim to be atheists, and most replies are indeed criticizing Islam, when it's not even relevant.

Asking a simple and unambiguous question and in return get bombarded with insults to his beliefs...

For indeed, every chance available is somehow an opportunity to criticize Islam, or one interpretation of it, shall I say.

Never have I heard such drivel.


1. The question wasnt about atheism. Has nothing to do with it so not sure what your point is. A question related to atheism would have been; How did the universe begin etc.
2. This was a thread he made in response to a previous thread. Where he compared incest to homosexuality and then claimed atheists support incest in ISOC.
3. When you ask a question which has nothing to do with a belief structure ofcourse you're going to get criticised. How naive of you. Atheism is the lack of a belief of a deity has there is no evidence to support such a claim. Where does incest fit into that again?

Fact is this thread was only made to generalise one persons view of incest to all atheists. http://prntscr.com/b41bx3

Stop with this Islam victim status. Getting so old.
How many times do I have to repeat this. The Quran and Islam can be, should be and will be criticised.
I simply stated that in Islam incest is encouraged which is it, blame interpretation all you like. Clearly my interpretation of Islam is the issue here... not Islam itself.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by mil88
All the OP was doing was asking a question? Simply seeing the views of those who claim to be atheists, and most replies are indeed criticizing Islam, when it's not even relevant.


It is relevant as the OP asked the question merely so that he could use the results (inaccurately) to arrogantly look down on atheists in the ISOC thread.
what really annoys me about this thread is that the thread starter has made no interaction with the thread repliers.

I find that slightly insulting.

If you are going to start a thread the least you can do is interact with the people who make an effort to reply to your question.

Students should be polite.

Manners Maketh the Man (or woman).

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you