Where do atheists get their morals from?

[Viking]

If you fail to plan, then you plan to fail.

this is not mere tripe, glib, but not tripe. This contains far more wisdom than the hearing listening bs BB came up with.

[grumbler]

You can hardly argue "God doesn't exist because he won't talk to me" if you haven't made any attempt to talk with Him.

OTOH, you can hardly argue that "my god does exist because I hear voices in my head" either.

[Barrister]

You can hardly argue "God doesn't exist because he won't talk to me" if you haven't made any attempt to talk with Him.

OTOH, you can hardly argue that "my god does exist because I hear voices in my head" either.

Sure you can.   

It may or not be persuasive, but you can argue it.

[Viking]

You can hardly argue "God doesn't exist because he won't talk to me" if you haven't made any attempt to talk with Him.

OTOH, you can hardly argue that "my god does exist because I hear voices in my head" either.

Mohammed ibn Abdullah did precisely that. He killed the people who brought up the point you do. Fortunately for you you were on dromons in the agean at the time and arabs don't float.

[Barrister]

Faith is belief without evidence, I can't respect that and I can't respect anybody who thinks that is a virtue.

I guess I'll have to survive with you not respecting me then. 

[Viking]

Faith is belief without evidence, I can't respect that and I can't respect anybody who thinks that is a virtue.

I guess I'll have to survive with you not respecting me then. 

So, are you going to drop the charges against the rapist who insists that he has faith that she really wanted it when she said no?

You have no respect for the rapist's faith and you do not think that believing the rapist is a virtue. I suggest that you apply my standards to faith when you are in the courtroom but in the rest of your life seem to assert that your faith claim deserves respect while you do not respect the faith claims of accused rapists.

[garbon]

So, are you going to drop the charges against the rapist who insists that he has faith that she really wanted it when she said no?

You have no respect for the rapist's faith and you do not think that believing the rapist is a virtue. I suggest that you apply my standards to faith when you are in the courtroom but in the rest of your life seem to assert that your faith claim deserves respect while you do not respect the faith claims of accused rapists.

Isn't it still rape even if he thought she wanted it?

[Razgovory]

Well I suppose it's good that Viking is not religious otherwise he wouldn't respect himself.  He might hurt himself.

[Barrister]

Faith is belief without evidence, I can't respect that and I can't respect anybody who thinks that is a virtue.

I guess I'll have to survive with you not respecting me then. 

So, are you going to drop the charges against the rapist who insists that he has faith that she really wanted it when she said no?

You have no respect for the rapist's faith and you do not think that believing the rapist is a virtue. I suggest that you apply my standards to faith when you are in the courtroom but in the rest of your life seem to assert that your faith claim deserves respect while you do not respect the faith claims of accused rapists.

The accuseds belief that she consented is negated when she says "No".  So what he believes really doesn't matter. 

Second of all... MEOWTF.  What the hell kind of analogy is that?

[Viking]

The accuseds belief that she consented is negated when she says "No".  So what he believes really doesn't matter. 

Second of all... MEOWTF.  What the hell kind of analogy is that?

I didn't say anything about guilt. His faith is irrelevant and his faith is also unconnected to the truth of the claim. You expect others to respect you and your beliefs when you insist that you have no evidence for it, but your working life is specifically geared to do the opposite.

[Barrister]

The accuseds belief that she consented is negated when she says "No".  So what he believes really doesn't matter. 

Second of all... MEOWTF.  What the hell kind of analogy is that?

I didn't say anything about guilt. His faith is irrelevant and his faith is also unconnected to the truth of the claim. You expect others to respect you and your beliefs when you insist that you have no evidence for it, but your working life is specifically geared to do the opposite.

In my working life I rarely, if ever, care what people believe - I care what they do, and what they intend to do.

As such, I find it easiest to respect what people believe, as it rarely affects my work otherwise.   

[Viking]

In my working life I rarely, if ever, care what people believe - I care what they do, and what they intend to do.

As such, I find it easiest to respect what people believe, as it rarely affects my work otherwise.   

And there we return to the point I was trying to make in the OP. You live your life in all cases where reality matters as if god did not exist. You do not get your morals from a book you get them from the same place we all do, our natural evolved moral sense. You do not consider the beliefs and faith of others relevant when they interact with you and with society in general. They have to justify themselves with facts and reason and they can't appeal to the book.

I keep bringing up biblical literalism here again and again simply because to get your morals from the bible you need to read it first. The moral code we live by is not sourced in the bible, much of it is found there, yes, but that is just as relevant as the same code being found the Koran and Hadith, the Eddas, Hesiod, the Bhagavadgita, the annalects of Confusius etc.

[Barrister]

In my working life I rarely, if ever, care what people believe - I care what they do, and what they intend to do.

As such, I find it easiest to respect what people believe, as it rarely affects my work otherwise.   

You do not consider the beliefs and faith of others relevant when they interact with you and with society in general. They have to justify themselves with facts and reason and they can't appeal to the book.

No.  If I'm dealing with a witness from Libya testifying in a Hijab (like I did last week) she does not need to justify her faith.  I simply respect her belief and allow her hair to be covered while she gives evidence.

[Malthus]

You can hardly argue "God doesn't exist because he won't talk to me" if you haven't made any attempt to talk with Him.

OTOH, you can hardly argue that "my god does exist because I hear voices in my head" either.

I only listen to the voices in my head when they tell me to kill. So far, they have never steered me wrong! 

[Viking]

In my working life I rarely, if ever, care what people believe - I care what they do, and what they intend to do.

As such, I find it easiest to respect what people believe, as it rarely affects my work otherwise.   

You do not consider the beliefs and faith of others relevant when they interact with you and with society in general. They have to justify themselves with facts and reason and they can't appeal to the book.

No.  If I'm dealing with a witness from Libya testifying in a Hijab (like I did last week) she does not need to justify her faith.  I simply respect her belief and allow her hair to be covered while she gives evidence.

She's not using her faith to justify an assertion of fact here. She is using her membership in a class of humanity to justify her access to a special exemption from a requirement of conduct by witnesses. She would need to justify her faith in the truth of the assertion that achmed was embezzling from abdullah's falafel shop.

If she was asserting that her faith told her that BB killed Col. Mustard with a lead pipe in the library then she would need to justify her faith. You are specifically not addressing the issue, the hijab testimony is a red herring.