Having been a atheist for most of my life before pulling my head out of my *** (something I would recommend you do sometime, the view really is much better on this side), I think I have a pretty good idea as to how atheists view the world. No presumption required here.
Presumption's not required, but you're neck-deep in it. All you're really doing is assuming I'm on the same wavelength you were back during your days as an atheist.
You just couldn't be more wrong here. People aren't altruistic left to their own devices...
Wow. And I thought I was cynical. Are you heartsick or just bitter? And don't give me the old "just being realistic" song and dance.
...if they were there would not be penal systems to enforce laws against "cooperating and working for our survival."
Uh, what? Some people commit crimes, and this...what--leads you to believe what, exactly, about altruism?
The world is in a constant state of chaos most of the time. Just watch the 9:00 news, you probably hear 90% of the broadcast dedicated to military conflict, reports on crime and journalistic exposes of social injustice.
Ummm, okay. Fair enough. Yes, as a species we're often a mess.
Then you'll get the occasional token human interest story.
Heaven forbid we're ever reminded of the better angels of our nature.
Our entire society is based on the presuposition that people are naturally inclined toward competing with one another for our survival (at the expense of others) and that laws need to be put in place to curb that inclination and force us to cooperate for our survival.
Such laws are in place to prevent the sick, sociopathic, minority amongst us from abuses. On that we agree, but I think you go too far. I don't see the world through rose-tinted glasses but brother, you are one dour piece of work. Healthy competition is one thing, but when lines are crossed, we have checks and balances in place. If you actually think we'd literally and figuratively tear each other's throats out without a set of instructions, you're well beyond misanthropy. Cooperation was established (and still can be) without codified law. Survival almost always trumps other concerns.
Furthermore the history of civilization tells us that some people will bond together in a social unit to cooperate with one another for the purpose of struggling with another social unit for dominance.
Yes. Some will.
Finally, if survival of the species is the criterion we are using to evaluate the morality of any particular behavior.
I'm not so sure I would. This wouldn't apply in some cases.
Homosexuality fails miserably in that analysis because the more homosexual behavior a society allows, the fewer offspring a society produces and the weaker that society becomes.
Mere acceptance of homosexuality won't lead to lower birth rates--homosexual behavior is as old as time, and here we are. As for the "weaker" comment, I dismiss this as typical, bigoted boilerplate.
No, I am telling you there we idiots.
What a charming, well-read, well-informed analysis.:yawn:
There is no rational point to having any convictions whatsoever if the atheists are right.
Yes, there are, and there can be. My convictions don't necessarily stem from my disbelief in God--you're just accentuating the negative, perhaps based on your past. Not sure.
What one believes is simply pointless phenomenology given an atheist paradigm.
Again: define what you mean.
