A Dark Apologetic

Having forfeited the last round because of work restraints (despite arguing in favor of this same thing with other people on Facebook during that time, Tyler, you scamp...), Tyler posted the following comment, to which I'll respond: "What Frank doesn't seem to understand is that I don't have to provide em evidence for anything. This argument doesn't try to prove God or objective morality. It simply points out the consequences of atheism and tells the atheist to practice what he preaches using techniques from religion." OK, so you are intent on setting up this debate dynamic where you define the terms and parameters into conformation with your strange (mis)understanding of these things, assert your baseless opinions as simply accepted, obvious, and unquestionable fact, demand that I respond to your opinions as though they are are obviously and unquestionably facts, refrain from requesting any evidence from you, and then agree that the only POSSIBLE option after all of those strange steps is... accepting nihilism and suicide as the best and only remaining options. Well, that's ridiculous as hell. I'm sorry that you've decided your opinion about religion's objective moral code and objective purpose is a fact that you don't have to defend, but that too is ridiculous as hell. When you insist that that atheism inevitably leads to nihilism and suicide because UNLIKE RELIGION, it offers no objective moral truth or purpose, and that atheists pretend to have some objective moral code or purpose by "using techniques from religion" (whatever that means), you are ASSERTING, without question, that atheism lacks the objective moral code and objective purpose of religion. THAT'S YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT! Atheism, according to you, leads to nihilism and suicide, while RELIGION AND THEISM DON'T, because atheism has no objective moral code and religion/faith/theism DO! You are citing that as a FACT, Tyler. That is the CRUX OF YOUR ARGUMENT. So I'm sorry that you want religion and faith offering objective moral truth and purpose to be an unquestionable and absolute given of this debate and also want to avoid the obligation to ever provide a SHRED of evidence for that, but you CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. I ABSOLUTELY REJECT your painfully childish assertion that subjectively choosing some magical being blesses the chooser with an objective moral code and a life-purpose. That is NONSENSE. Christianity in particular is OBVIOUSLY the furthest thing from a path to moral objectivity. Which is why the embarrassing mess that is the Bible has spawned hundreds or thousands of sects and remains endlessly and uselessly interpretive. There's absolutely nothing objective about it. And we're not talking about some non-Bible-affiliated god, because you are the one who cited that god in the conclusion of your... Dark Apologetic. So the religious HAVE NO OBJECTIVE MORAL CODE. They just don't. They don't have an objective moral purpose either, as the details of serving, worshiping, appeasing, avoiding-angering, pleasing this god (or whatever god) is as interpretive and subjective as everything else about religious fables. So, unless you can provide evidence that a god exists (specifically YOUR GOD), that this objective moral code exists, and outline this objective moral code for us, entirely or in part, your dark apologetic and claim that atheists are (mis)appropriating some feature of religion is simply inaccurate and useless. As for atheists necessarily having to... choose nihilism and/or suicide if they're being honest - that's hilariously inane and fantastically absurd. For one, you don't seem to understand these terms. Atheists aren't insisting that no gods could possibly exist. We are rejecting the god claims of theists for a reason you should be really familiar with: theists are incapable of providing ANY even marginally compelling evidence that their pet deity exists. And refusing to arbitrarily and subjectively just choose among the thousands of deities worshiped on this planet (all with an equivalent and apparently absolute lack of any legitimate evidence) is not the first inevitable step toward nihilism and suicide. It's being an adult. So you've mischaracterized atheists as some breed of hard, absolute anti-theists, and we're not. At least I'm not and I don't know any atheists who are. You're also conflating atheism with skepticism. There are plenty of atheists who believe in things, supernatural and otherwise, without legitimate/sufficient evidence to do so for one reason or another. You happen to believe that your god belief is the best supernatural belief and therefore the only one that matters. And if anyone is CRAZY enough to reject Tyler's god belief, obviously their.. daily mind-purifying introspection will lead them to reject every other possible supernatural belief. And without those, for you at least, life just isn't worth living. Well Tyler, your insistence that atheism MUST lead to nihilism is inaccurate, obviously, just like your claim that suicide is the only possible recourse for someone after they've fallen into the abyss of nihilism is your strange, emo, subjective opinion. And again, it's an opinion that says a LOT MORE about your personal seemingly desperate reliance on this god belief you have. For you, without this comforting, soothing, arbitrary, subjective belief in a Hebrew tribal war god making life and death less frightening, your life would literally not be worth living. Thankfully, your subjective opinion is NOT universal. EVEN IF someone becomes a nihilist, decides that life has no objective purpose and no objective moral code... why would that necessarily lead to suicide?! Discounting all of the excellent and entirely compelling reasons to live - IF SOMEONE BELIEVES THAT THIS LIFE THAT'S AN ACCIDENT OF THE COSMOS IS ALL THEY WILL EVER HAVE, THAT MAKES THIS LIFE INFINITELY MORE PRECIOUS TO THEM THAN SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THAT THEIR SOUL WILL FLY UP TO HEAVEN AFTER THEY DIE! Why would life be SOOOOOoooo precious to some theist who believes that this existence is just a place to wipe their feet and grovel to some god before their REAL life begins FOR ETERNITY after they're dead. This life is less than a blink when compared to eternity. Compared to eternity, it's brief to the point of virtual nonexistence. It is SO, SO brief, right? And... that makes it so much more important to the personal who believes that than to the person who believes that this blink is ALL WE GET between the big voids of nothing on either side of our lives? You think the only logical option for people who believe that is to... end this one brief little shot at existing early? That's one of the most absurd conclusions I can possibly imagine. Tyler, become one with actual rational, reality-based cognition and embrace logic and really basic common sense. Also - provide evidence that religion has ANY objective moral code or stop making that claim.