His next offering will probably be just as interesting as a dead pigeon too.

I would challenge the easily dog-whistled Boazy to direct his purported Muslim friends from YouTube to this forum to read what he really thinks about them.

That would seem to me to be reasonable, since he's always exhorting us to visit the YouTube garbage with which he is apparently obsessed.

But to be fair, you can find absolutely anything on the web if you want to.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/1008072scuba1.html

Someone else "making it up as they go", eh, Boaz?

By their deeds shall ye know them

Ah the old 'secular people have no basis for morality' argument.

It's actually quite an interesting one - I can see the theory behind it, but not the practicality.

It was one of the central things Nietzsche looked at - Boaz, if it's something you're really interested in, have a look at the wikipedia entry for 'god is dead.'
It's not the literal meaning of course, more that with the rise of reason, the concept of god has taken a battering thus the basis for morality becomes a key question.

It's rather an interesting read.

Hi Ditch...you said:

[Nonsense. You have not substantiated this and I challenge you to do so. Your claim implies any non Christian is incapable of behaving morally. What rubbish]

I quite agree... such an assertion would indeed be rubbish. The problem is.. you misunderstand the point and I didn't assert that.

It is not that lack of reference to God will mean amorality, but it will mean ANY morality.. get it ? :) Put 2 people together Fred and Joe.. on my favorite island.. limited resources. Fred says to himself "I must discuss with Joe over there about sharing" in contrast..Joe says "Hmm.. without Fred, I can have it all...I'll kill him"

That....is my point. Both would be living according to the 'morality' they have developed. Both were developed based on survival. Who is to say which is 'more moral' ?

You are also assuming that morality with which atheists will act.. is going to be an agreed or universally applicable one..and that my friend is a logical fallacy,with no basis in anthropological, sociological philosophical and perhaps the most important.."historical" -fact.

One does not need to 'prove' this.. it can be stated as the bleeding obvious.

In the same way that a rudderless ship in a stormy sea will be pushed this way and that... how plain does one have to make it ?

HINT.. 'try to flush out all those inherited (often Christian) presuppositions and ideas about what is good and proper and expose you thinking to raw reality'

PERRRRRICLES....

you said:

"If there is a difference, Boaz, it exists only in your mind. To those whom you target, telling them that they fit within, in your view, an immoral category, is exactly the same as calling them immoral, as individuals."

You see ? :) you did it..A-GAIN.. and here it is.

"an immoral category"

That is not, has not been..and will continue not to be.. my point.
Refer my post above for the answer.

I maintain.. that the morality of the unbeliever is completely arbitrary.. is might be a HEALTHY morality.. it might be a 'PEACEFUL' morality.. or.. it might not. That.... THAT....is the point

You persist in your rather resilient philosophical myopia.

Ditch.. please consider the above..as well as the other post.

"Some aspects of Islam being dangerous" does not mean all muslims follow such things or are evil. But Hizb Ut Tahrir IS.. based on the scholars they adhere to. You just cannot SEE that evil at this time, because you fail to understand their program, or the theological underpinnning of that group.

"Some aspects of national socialism being evil" does not mean all Germans are evil.

"Some aspects of Buddhism being irrational", does not mean all Buddhists are 'bad' people..(irrational maybe)

"Stating that Hindusism is pantheism" does not mean Hindu's are 'bad' people. But it DOES mean that stict Hindus follow a strong sytem of social caste and class based on their religion..and this disadvantages many in tragic ways..and will never be addressed while they are under Hindu regime.

But there is no Hizb Ut Hindu or Hizb Ut Buddha in Australia... so they don't get much flack from me.

Back 2 Topic.. Yes.. It's the Lord Jesus.. re-focus please.