Another believer carries out his programmingNovember 9, 2007 — Deacon Duncan
As predicted, the school shooting in Finland is producing robotic knee-jerks from believers. Heres one from the PaleoBlog:
“I’m a natural selector and will eliminate all those I see as unfit,” Sturmgeist89 wrote on You Tube recently.That’s Darwinism in a nutshell.
No, that’s the perverted Darwinism you get from a nut, with or without his shell. What is it with Christians and their sources of authority anyway? If you want to know what that lumpy dark thing growing on your arm is, do you go to a dermatologist to find out what he thinks, or do you go to the psych ward to find out what the patients think? If your car is making a funny noise, do you take it to a mechanic or a maniac? Let a legitimate scientist try to explain what evolution does and does not mean, and the faithful will just stare blankly. Let a psychopathic killer express some twisted misapplication of evolutionary theory, and they leap from their baths and run naked down the street crying “Eureka!!”
And of course, what would an irrational rant be without the obligatory lie about having no secular basis for morality?
Anyone adheres to an atheistic worldview lacks the necessary foundation to make moral judgments. Oh, the atheist will try to say that his worldview allows for things like good and bad, right and wrong, but such notions are meaningless in a philosophy that wishes man to remain unaccountable to a Creator. Doing what’s “right” boils down to doing what feels good “right now.”
Evidently nothing is right or wrong in and of itself, according to Lee Shelton. If murder were actually wrong in and of itself, then atheists would have a secular, godless reason to condemn it, since it’s inherently wrong. The only reason you would need some 3rd party authority, such as God, to arbitrarily designate it as “wrong” would be if there were nothing about the act itself, or its consequences, that would enable us to discern its wrongness.
Can believers really be so morally insensitive? Can they not see that the real-world results of murder are what make it bad? Have they no concept of consequences, of what “good” and “evil” mean in real life? Adding an imaginary character to watch disapprovingly (and passively) does nothing to provide us with any kind of moral framework, especially given the fact that God never shows up in real life to tell us what His moral standards are. Mr. Shelton can base his moral judgments on the subjective opinions of self-appointed prophets and Bible scholars if he likes, but if you want a solid, objective, and realistic morality you’re better off with secular ethics. An absentee God is worse than no God at all.