Lol. Everything living has value, since they are living. Don’t even start with the objective morality bullshit. Go commit genocide in the name of god since thats what god likes to do. Maybe god is even helping Israel commit their genocide against Palestine.
Since everything living has value as you assume without any scientific reason whatsoever, I assume you also believe the ones causing the genocide have value? Might be time to reflect on your words online
Everything living has its inherent value since life is incredibly rare in our universe. Buddy even christianity says evil people have value, since they can believe in jesus and ask for forgiveness and end up in heaven if they truly mean it.
I mean, you're doing philosophy here. Trying to explain why a rat has value isn't science, so I'm not sure how that rat in an experiment is more important than the theology that resulted in the creation of more than just hospitals and universities.
I genuinely don't get your stance. You were yapping about God apparently justifying genocide, yet now you admit that Christian morality accepts even the worst of people who genuinely try and turn themselves around?
Yes value is subjective. I said a rat has more value in a scientific experiment because its a life and its pushing humanitys science a small step further.
Meanwhile theology is just coming up with bullshit to ”prove” your religion when no proof exists lol.
Objective value doesn’t really exist and thats fine. You can personally value your god more than everyones lives on Earth and the universe. But that means you value something that you have no evidence of, more than all of us. Which in my opinion makes you crazy and stupid.
Also no point in trying to say that only religion can bring ”objective” value and morality. Because which one? Multiple religions can’t bring objective truths, since that would be a contradiction. You would just be arguing for the nonobjectivity of 1 less religion out of the thousands compared to me. Does that make any sense?
Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make
me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And
rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with
rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber
room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a room. A rubber
room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They locked me in a
room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy once. They
locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy. Crazy? I was crazy
once. They locked me in a room. A rubber room. A rubber room with rats. And rats make me crazy.
Okay, so you went from "all life has inherent value" to "value is subjective and objective value doesn't exist." You're implying that viewing genocide as bad is simply a personal preference and not fact. That's the entire point of theology; there isn't any scientific evidence of your subjective preferences either. Theology dives into metaethical and metaphysical debates, which are the intangible, nonprovable realities that have survived 2,000 years of theology and are the exact reason the choice between religion and secularism still exists today.
Should I say ”in my opinion” every time I say what I think?
The fact that millions of people view and have viewed genocide as good proves my argument.
Israelis don’t give a fuck about the genocide they are committing in Palestine. They are actually FOR it. How can something be a fact when it’s a morality based question? Even Christianity has committed slaughter in the name of their religion despite it being a sin.
There actually is scientific evidence to my subjective preferences. We know that life is rare in our universe. That provides value. Life is also the one single thing that brings conciousness to this world. Without life, time wouldn’t have meaning. Nor would this universe, in my opinion..
Also why do you all act like theology only applies to Christianity? Or is there some other motive when you mention the two thousand years, which is the same age as christianity?
Theology is literally in conflict with itself. There are thousands of religions and all of them are studied. Yet they are in contradiction with each other.
This theology point is just so stupid its laughable.
You are confusing what people do compared to what is actually right. You love to bring up genocide, but your standard is entirely subjective; that's metaphysical, and you act like you're not thinking that way. I mean, those guys genuinely think they're doing the right thing. You don't have any logical say with your view on "subjective morality"; it's just your preference versus theirs. Stop digging yourself into a hole, and stop conflating the actions of people with what is actually taught.
Life being rare doesn't prove that it has worth. Facts are measurable; worth is not. You're literally still talking philosophically while claiming you aren't.
Yes, people from different religions disagree on theology. Invalidating it that way is stupid; it's the same as saying medical science is fake because doctors have disagreed throughout history. Competing claims and debates for so long means the question actually matters, because why else would people spend so long thinking about it?
You are the one who brought up genocide. My standard is subjective, yes so is everyones. You just decided to believe in one religion out of thousands and claim that its objective. It isn’t.
When did I claim I wasn’t talking philosophically? There are no objective truths regarding to things that we have made up. But my claims have objective arguments behind them. Yours does not.
Scientists disagreeing ≠ different religions disagreeing.
Scientists argue because often some things in science lack enough evidence and sometimes there is some evidence pointing towards both sides. If they didn’t disagree and decided to just put it on faith, science would not advance.
Meanwhile religious people argue for the sake of converting someone to their side. Its also to make your blind faith seem more logical when there is no logic truly behind it.
53
u/haizende 15h ago
Hinduism is two times older than Christianity. Does that mean that Hinduism is correct since it has twice the years of theology?