-
ORIGINAL: jackbauer
I have never heard an atheist actually defend their own ideas of society, unless they admit to being determinist-anarchists.
So, can you do it? Can you defend your own position? I think it’s impossible, and I’ve heard others claim that it’s impossible, but of course those “others” are right-wing religious zealots. So I ask you: is it possible?
The problem jack, is that you create an impossible scenario. Your beliefs are simple, God exists, God creates Laws that all must follow, an absence of a belief (that includes agnosticism) in God means no God-given laws, ergo, lawlessness. That is your given and assumption & ask others who don’t believe as you do to “prove” otherwise, all the while with the de facto argument that an absence of God-given laws means lawlessness. erad has stated his belief in sociology, Hero in Humanism, I in other “religious” flavors such as Buddhism, observed animal/mammal social behavior and philosophy and Law. You apparently accept none of these, presumably because they are contrary to your given that without God there is no Law, period. It is YOUR belief and assumption that without God, non-believers are “determinist-anarchists,” not any of ours.
BTW, please define that term, “determinist-anarchists” as it makes no sense to me & I would assume neither does it relate to Hero and erad)
If that is the given in this puzzle, how can your proposal be argued at all? Do you allow that Laws can exist without God for the sake of your question?
