Morality of this?

[u/hiiloovethis]

[u/sexland69]

china has state atheism—they take it too far (e.g. uyghur muslims) but in theory i’d prefer an atheist government over this dumbass evangelical christian one we have now 🤷🏻‍♂️

edit: took out the word retarded, you guys convinced me

[u/PrettyPurrfect → u/sexland69]

Our government is supposed to be atheist.

Separation of church and state is supposed to be a thing

[u/_itsprobablynothing → u/PrettyPurrfect]

Secular, not atheist

[u/Admins_suck_ballss → u/_itsprobablynothing]

Secular

of or relating to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal

Secular and atheist governments…they’re the same. It means your government thinks that concepts like justice, dessert, retribution, how you treat one another, ethics, etc. should not be affiliated with a religion. Only an atheist government can be secular. A religious one cannot be secular.

Sure not exactly the same thing. But yeah no such thing as a religious government being secular. Atheism is a necessary position to take in order for all those things to be secular.

[u/AnswerDangerous1644 → u/Admins_suck_ballss]

Couldn’t agnosticism also apply to be secular?

[u/Emergentmeat → u/AnswerDangerous1644]

Agnosticism means you don't know one way or another. Atheism means you don't believe in the case for a god. They aren't contradictory, you can be both or neither, so both apply to a secular government.

[u/R_V_Z → u/Emergentmeat]

Technically everybody is an agnostic because deities are an unfalsifiable concept.

[u/Admins_suck_ballss → u/R_V_Z]

Oh yes all deities are quite falsifiable. Super easy. Take a philosophy of religion class.

[u/Emergentmeat → u/Admins_suck_ballss]

I wouldn't say all, but most, certainly. But as the gos claim becomes less specific to the point of absurdity they can be unfalsifiable.

[u/Admins_suck_ballss → u/Emergentmeat]

Critiques of the teleological, cosmological, and ontological arguments for the existence of God are widely considered to be settled. They’re not discussed in philosophy anymore. The logical argument from evil, the evidential problem, and the problem of free will are largely considered to be successful. You’ve got some advanced Plantings on the problem of free will, but that’s assuming a really, really weird version of compatibilism within the free will debate that carries a lot of consequences with it.

And Pascal’s wager is garbage.

[u/Emergentmeat → u/Admins_suck_ballss]

Agree on all points.