DiscussMormonism.com

mfbukowski wrote:A moral life is more peaceful and conducive to long term survival of the species than an immoral life.

If we are drinking and driving, our lives will not be pleasant or long. We will not survive long. If we cheat on our wives, life gets complicated- divorce, children out of wedlock, fewer two-parent families, children raised not as well or efficiently as they might be etc.

All these "sins" lead to a shortened life and a less than optimal life style. That is the meaning of "the wages of sin are death".

We are saved from these sins by expelling them from our lives- in other words, by "repentance and righteous living". "The natural man is an enemy to God". We must overcome our more base impulses and live in a "civilized" way which is what is required for the optimal society.

This life is simply the best that humans can have. That is why living morally "works" and is "true". It defines itself that way. It is considered "moral" and "civilized" because it is the best lifestyle humans have

These become what we can call "moral absolutes" because they absolutely always work for the survival of the species.

SAUCE

Wow.

I wanted to create a gif. for this but...

I can't shake the feeling he's all too serious about this, and completely and totally oblivious how well his justifications line up with past arguments of why the cognitively disabled should sterilized.

I also think he's on shaky ground in terms of what behaviors "absolutely" enhance survival (and let's not forget the all-important reproduction). The fact is that predatory behavior is often rewarded in terms of survival and reproduction.

Ugh. The opportunism of vulgar pragmatism. Hey, it works for me!

One of the most common Y-chromosomes in Asia was spread far and wide by Genghis Khan, demonstrating his success at individual long-term survival. Rape and pillage is moral behavior for the individual? Guess so.

Blixa wrote:Ugh. The opportunism of vulgar pragmatism. Hey, it works for me!

Ha, ha, ha!

Such brilliance.

Ok I've got it. Glad you all set me straight. The existence of predatory behavior, which if you have not noticed, mostly lands you in jail nowadays, proves that civilization did not evolve, and has no survival value whatsoever.

Gosh, why didn't I think of that?

Bye now.

mfbukowski wrote:A moral life is more peaceful and conducive to long term survival of the species than an immoral life.

If we are drinking and driving, our lives will not be pleasant or long. We will not survive long.

Every atheist and agnostic I know is opposed to drinking and driving. And the secular law of the land makes it illegal.

If we cheat on our wives, life gets complicated- divorce, children out of wedlock, fewer two-parent families, children raised not as well or efficiently as they might be etc.

Every atheist and agnostic that I know is opposed to cheating on your spouse. Every atheist and agnostic I know believes children should be raised in a stable home with loving parents.

All these "sins" lead to a shortened life and a less than optimal life style. That is the meaning of "the wages of sin are death".

We are saved from these sins by expelling them from our lives- in other words, by "repentance and righteous living". "The natural man is an enemy to God". We must overcome our more base impulses and live in a "civilized" way which is what is required for the optimal society.

Every atheist and agnostic I know lives in a "civilized" (not sure why you put this word in quotes) way. The secular laws of the land are designed for a civilized society.

This life is simply the best that humans can have. That is why living morally "works" and is "true". It defines itself that way. It is considered "moral" and "civilized" because it is the best lifestyle humans have

These become what we can call "moral absolutes" because they absolutely always work for the survival of the species.

That's great. And would it be OK for you if everyone in the world lives these moral absolutes while totally rejecting the LDS gospel?

A moral life is more peaceful and conducive to long term survival of the species than an immoral life.

He's right. It's akin to the truism communicated by Noah Webster that the foundation of a free government is Christianity.

Actually, the people who land in jail are the small time thieves. Corruption is and always has been widespread and the greatest thefts go routinely unpunished. Just before Bush left office, a small group of people managed to come up with a document on a few pages in length that stole billions of taxpayer money in a supposed "bailout." It was just as obvious then as it is now that bailouts do not work. The American people spoke out in record numbers and the vote failed. Then, immediately another vote was taken and it passed... despite what the people wanted.

Then there was that time billions of dollars in cash just disappeared and Congress decided that no one was at fault.

People have been given 20 years in prison for smoking a joint, 5 years for stealing a TV. No jail time is given for stealing a billion dollars. That is an important lesson in the facts of life for anyone who places any stock in our justice system. Morality and fairness has very, very little to do with it.

Landing in jail, also, has virtually nothing to do with how much an individual creates offspring. The more educated and "moral" a couple is, the fewer children they have, generally. A couple of lower socioeconomic status tends to generate more children.

I would have to conclude that mfbukowski's theory is full of all kinds of fail. It is derived from a very clouded world view. Being religious (or Mormon) does not make better people. Per capita, atheists are still the most under-represented in prison.

So, if we were going to go with the "most moral" people, by mfbukowski's definition (jail = lack of morality = lack of ability to reproduce) then maybe everyone should be an atheist.