In response to:

The Atheist Response to Sandy Hook

Michael3783 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:17 AM
One of my (many) problems with atheism is the corollary to atheism: specifically, in the absence of a "God", on what basis are moral judgments made? Suppose the Newtown shooter sincerely believed that he was relieving 20 children from future suffering? Was he pursuing something morally good? Who decides right from wrong? To the Deist, right and wrong are determined by an objective Creator, but implemented by (hopefully) just men, desiring approbation in good faith service to God. To the Atheist, it is Man. I am not suggesting that organized religion has always done well, but the deist ideal supports a civilization rooted in lasting objective morality, while the atheist ideal is subject to human whim imposed by force.
Tacitus X Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:34 AM
How about a moral code based on reason and an appropriate assessment of the nature of man and reality?

BTW, you're confusing the word "deist" with the word "theist." Read a little on the topic before you post.
Cambermeister Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:43 AM
"a moral code based on reason and an appropriate assessment of the nature of man and reality"

Sure seems like a torchered bloviation.
Joseph64 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:47 AM
The problem with that is that man has an inherent bent towards doing evil to one another so a "moral code based on natural human behavior" would be an oxymoron.
Michael3783 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 11:26 AM
Reason, along with science, is merely man's attempt to understand the order created by God - it doesn't create anything not already in existence. And check the dictionary for Deism. The word means precisely what I intended.

Exhibit A that atheists can be smug know-it-alls.
TeachaMan Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 11:55 AM
The revolutionaries that created the French "Reign of Terror", resulting in tens of thousands of murders of "enemies of the state" - to include nearly 17,000 public beheadings via guillotine, acted in obeyance to a moral code based on "reason". This "reason" erased all moral connections to the church, arguing that the Catholic Church was no more than a function of the dynastically controlled aristocracy. In their zeal to divest themselves from aristocratic rule, they did away with all previous moral, social, and even intellectual (see the creation of the metric system) mores and traditions in favor of the new "order". This eventually resulted in the usurpation of absolute power by a dictator - Napoleon Bonaparte.
Cambermeister Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 10:21 AM
Those children would have experienced plenty of heartache in life.
Mike2348 Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 2:10 PM
Perhaps, but they likely would also have experieced much love, joy, beauty, & laughter as well. You know...those things that make life worth living.
Last week the New York Times published an opinion piece that offered atheism's response to the evil/tragedy in which 20 children and six adults were murdered at the Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut.

What prompted Susan Jacoby to write her piece was a colleague telling her that atheism "has nothing to offer when people are suffering."

She wrote the piece, "The Blessings of Atheism" ("It is Here and It is Now!" screams the subhead) to prove her colleague wrong by offering a consoling atheist alternative to religion's consoling belief in an afterlife. Atheists cannot believe that there is any...

Related Tags: Guns Atheists Sandy Hook