Which is it?

No religion has a monopoly on "Universal Truths".

Actually that is kind of exactly what religion claims to be. I can think of no religion that doesn't lay claim to universal truths. The problem lies in the fact that many religions have mutually exclusive truths.

Where major religions are similar is where they are closer to human universal truths. Things like "don't kill each other", "don't steal from each other", stuff like that.

Agreed. And those are easily explicable without reliance on the supernatural. We are social animals. Those rules help maintain social stability with gives us an evolutionary and survival advantage.
 
Actually that is kind of exactly what religion claims to be. I can think of no religion that doesn't lay claim to universal truths. The problem lies in the fact that many religions have mutually exclusive truths.



Agreed. And those are easily explicable without reliance on the supernatural. We are social animals. Those rules help maintain social stability with gives us an evolutionary and survival advantage.
Sorry, Perry, but only delusional nutjobs believe religions can talk or claim anything.

No shit. Thanks for understanding my point. There's no such thing as magic nor anything that violates the laws of physics.
 
Disagreed with this statement:

Run if you like, Perry. In fact, I expected it.

Of course I'm going to run. I'm actually in a good mood today and don't really want your poison in my head. And that's usually all you ever do when you speak to me; spew bile.

No need for it today! It's a good day, a long weekend and I'm happy.

I wish you a good weekend.
 
No religion has a monopoly on "Universal Truths". Where major religions are similar is where they are closer to human universal truths. Things like "don't kill each other", "don't steal from each other", stuff like that.
Slight disagreement.
I don't think the prohibition against killing, the golden rule, the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself are universal human truths that just naturally arise from Darwinian evolution.

Ritual child sacrifice made perfect sense to the religious sensibilities of the Canaanites, Carthaginians, Phoenicians. Human sacrifice was perfectly logical and neccessary to the Aztecs.
 
Of course I'm going to run. I'm actually in a good mood today and don't really want your poison in my head. And that's usually all you ever do when you speak to me; spew bile.

No need for it today! It's a good day, a long weekend and I'm happy.

I wish you a good weekend.
^^^
Spouts lies then claims it's others who are at fault. Sad.
 
Slight disagreement.
I don't think the prohibition against killing, the golden rule, the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself is a universal human truth that just naturally arises from Darwinian evolution.

Ritual child sacrifice made perfect sense to the religious sensibilities of the Canaanites, Carthaginians, Phoenicians.
Not Darwinian evolution, but human social evolution. How could a village or tribe band together if murder, rape and theft were rampant?

A great way to remove mouths to feed, families with too many children or the presence of too many captives. :thup:
IMO, for village/tribal cohesivenness, it would depend upon how the sacrifices were selected.
 
That's not what I asked.

I asked for examples of real cases of it happening.

Assuming you are not misrepresenting the intent of the law, I can't see any sane doctor performing an abortion on a healthy baby a day before it is due to be born, unless the mother's life is in danger.
It doesn't happen. PIMP is lying, just like all forced-birthers do.


In rare cases a stillborn pre-term fetus may be delivered before the due date. If the fetus is healthy but labor would endanger the mom's life, a physician may opt to deliver it early -- but this does NOT result in the death of the fetus.
 
Not Darwinian evolution, but human social evolution. How could a village or tribe band together if murder, rape and theft were rampant?

A great way to remove mouths to feed, families with too many children or the presence of too many captives. :thup:
IMO, for village/tribal cohesivenness, it would depend upon how the sacrifices were selected.
Babies and small children were abandoned to the wolves if Nomadic tribes percieved they would be an undue burden to tribal resources.

Living in the comfortable 21st century, it's easy for us to assume the golden rule has always applied to human societies.

The Hebrew bible was almost unique in the bronze age in that has a deep and abiding concern with social justice. At least compared to contemporaneous literature.

The code of Hammurabi is basically a criminal and civil code. Not a code of ethical truth.

I've read Plato and Aristotle, and there is very little direct concern for the poor, the oppressed, the downtrodden, concepts of charity. Plato wanted to practice eugenics.

There is very little in the Daodejing and Analects of Confucius that directly deals with social justice and economic inequality.

I don't think the ethical framework we take for granted just spontaneously arises due to known laws of evolution and biology.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top