https://twitter.com/hashtag/ExposeChristianSchools?src=hash

@Bird Wizard
>why harp on about Christianity when there are worse religions?
I agree there are much worse religions but they lack the impact and proximity that Christianity has to me so when it comes to levelling critique at practices that specifically impact my life the dumb assertions made by some christians (#notall, some christians are very well informed) are the most immediate. Beyond that I can walk and chew gum at once and We don’t need to punish all the murderers before we punish a single shoplifter, I can juggle criticising stupid aspects of Christian belief and criticising other beliefs just as fine.

>secularism undermines the church
Is your point seriously criticising the absence of spiritual authority in temporal affairs as undermining the church community while attempting to dunk on other faiths for wishing to have the same authority? How does this make you any different? Nor can I think anyone can accuse non-religious movements of being *over* represented in influence or pushing their narrative through secular channels where every single American president has professed to be a Christian of some denomination and while at other levels it isn’t quite so stark the non-religious are still significantly under-represented compared to the slice of the population they occupy.

>paganism has multiple authorities
As does Christianity in practice. Orthodox and protestant christians pay very little heed and in turn protestants and Catholics pay no attention to the patriarchs. In the same way as each establishes its own canon pagan religions determine their own pantheon and largely script a message which unites them under some creed.

I do agree paganism isn’t really relevant on any stage though and is unlikely to become so

Returning to the “undermining the church” meme there’s actually a bit of a divide between anti-religious movements and non-religious movements which find reason to support aspects of religious movements. The dichotomy between Dawkins and Haidt is an apt illustration

Richard "infanticide is ok" Dawkins

I don’t think Dawkins advocates infanticide and his statements have been strictly related to that for animals in evolutionary terms infanticide is an adaptive behaviour. Evolution is not lauded as a moral system however and nor should it be taken as one

I agree though Dawkins is not above criticism and he’s certainly less than charitable towards agnostics

as I said relative morality, by saying it's not a morality system it dodges the question of why not. No hard stance on any immoral behaviour as everything is adaptive behaviour.
At least Christian values stamp out the undesirables like murderers and thiefs while a secularist tries to reason their existence and justify the acts.

Evolution provides a moral system

Survival requires teamwork

and then u have this brainlet

yes

Your conflating a description of real systems with a moral judgement which it’s not. It so happens that to my knowledge Dawkins is a moral relativist but he I believe he would still likely decry infanticide and he certainly seeks to punish murderers and thieves. It is not a requirement that non-religious people be moral relativists by any means and ayn rand for example prompted an objective morality based on self interest.

Evolution doesn’t provide a value statement as to whether action is right or wrong only that shit that reproduces tends to reproduce. Teamwork in and of itself is not evidence of a moral system as people can frequently work together to achieve things they freely admit is unethical

Additionally wizard you can at the same time understand why someone took a certain course of action while stating that action was wrong

I'm saying the process itself does

which is true

It provides a dangerous perspective where morality is presented as something arbitrary. You expose the perspective of a murderer and suddenly everyone is a bleeding heart murderer that had his own deep reasoning for why he did it. We call it motive and it doesn't justify the murder yet something like this is presented as kill or be killed.

This is a fact

Why is survival good? We’re all just bags of meat who will be forgotten soon

Good thing nobody thinks like that

I for one keep arguing that just surviving is no way to live

Yeah, because you don’t actually believe what you espouse

No, I have no idea what i believe

You say you believe in Darwinism or atheism or whatever but you don’t act like you do

You act like there is purpose

atheism isn't a belief system

oh it is

It obviously is though

Tell me more

You believe there is no God. Unless you’re agnostic

because u can't have no belief system, you mind operates in hypotheticals and precognitions constantly

Correct

it's the absence of a specific belief system. There is no ideology behind atheism itself

it is not a guiding force

it has no set of principles or rules on its own

it is simply the absence of a certain mindset

You say that but you don’t believe it

scientism moved in recently

If you did you wouldn’t be arguing for atheism

and it's cringier than any established religion

You're right, I don't

anyways