[MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu>:

> [Platt]
> Sorry. I'm not a biblical scholar. However, if you read what the 
> Founding Fathers wrote, I think you'll find many references to God 
> and the Christian heritage.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Just because they say "God" once or twice does not mean that what 
> they propose was based in "Christian ethics". But since you can't 
> find any support that any of the "rights" granted to us by the 
> Constitution derive from "Christian ethics", I stand by my claim that 
> they "derive" from enlightenment reason.

Well I haven't looked very hard. Do really want to get bogged down on
whether the Founding Fathers were influenced by Christianity? In other
words, are you asserting that Christian ethics had little to do with
their decisions and want me to show evidence otherwise?
 
> [Platt previously]
> "Belief" is not a prerequisite for an individual to have the rights 
> to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
> 
> [Arlo then]
> Can you give me _ANY_ Biblical quote or passage to support this? 
> Why,  if this is a "Christian ethic", did the Founders permit slavery?
> 
> [Platt]
> Slavery was ended by those who believed in the Christian ethic.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Slavery was ended because of humanist reasoning. If it was "Christian 
> ethics", then why did the "Founders" permit slavery, when you argue 
> that they based what they did on this ethic?

What is this humanist ethic you keep bringing up and what is it's basis if not
Christianity? Buddhism perhaps? Or Zen?

> [Platt]
> The right to life precludes beheadings and wholesale slaughter.
> 
> [Arlo]
> As it does in Humanist Reason. By submitting to your "right to life", 
> I guarantee my own. It is a superior social contract that allows 
> maximum freedom (and DQ) for all involved. No God needed.
> 
> [Arlo previously]
> And let's talk some more about "Christian ethics". What about the 
> primary message of Christ (other than accepting Him as Savior)? This 
> could easily be restated "Feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, heal 
> the sick". Would you suggest our laws be based on these? Or, again, 
> do you pick and choose "Christian ethics" as it gives you power over 
> others, dismissing those ethics that would cause you to sacrifice?
> 
> [Platt]
> Those are all good things to do provided you don't force others to do them...
> 
> [Arlo]
> Why do you then force other aspects of Christian ethics on people?

You mean the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? This is
not force; this is preventing force abrogating those rights.
> 
> [Platt]
> ... and make recepients dependent on them, i.e., teach a man to fish.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Where did Jesus say not to provide shelter for people in a way that 
> makes them dependent? Where did he say not to give hungry people food 
> lest they become dependent? Teach a man to fish, sure, but don't stop 
> feeding him in the meantime. Same with healthcare.

So you want to make people dependent on the state? It figures.

> [Platt]
> Jesus said something about render unto Caesar the things that are 
> his, and unto God the things that are His, or words to that effect. 
> Jesus was anything but Marx.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Jesus said it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a 
> needle than a rich man to enter Heaven. Jesus was, indeed, a Marxist. 
> Feed the poor, heal the sick, shelter the homeless, renounce material 
> pleasures (notice how all his disciples gave away all their possessions?).

No. Jesus didn't believe in forcing people to do anything at the point of 
a sword.

> [Platt]
> You'll not there is nothing in the Declaration or the Constitution 
> about rights that have to be provided by the forced labor of others 
> such as food, shelter and health care.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Right, because they are not based on the Christian ethic.

Where in the Bible does it say Jesus advocated slavery?




-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/