» Help Support .NET!
DCSportbikes Premier Membership for 25$ per year. Discounts! Click here for full information.

Now available in the .NET Shop:

Get your DCSBN Gear!
» Shoutbox
Sorry, only registered users have the ability to use our real-time shoutbox to chat with other members.

Register now, it's free!
» Online Users: 530
3 members and 527 guests
CrazyMotorcycleGuy, GRN96WS6, Sal_the_man
Most users ever online was 4,519, September 2, 2015 at 03:26 AM.
Go Back   DCSportbikes.net > Non-Sportbike Forums > Non-Sportbike Chat

LinkBack Thread Tools
Considering Humanism? Episode 2: Absolutely Against the Absolute
Derpentine Dealer
OrangeShirtDude's Avatar
Posts: 12,465
Join Date: April 6, 2007
Location: "Going Bonkers"
Considering Humanism? Episode 2: Absolutely Against the Absolute - November 18, 2010, 03:39 PM

Here’s another of the American Humanist Association’s videos:

Sounds damning for Christianity, right? Not quite, there’s a problem. The Humanist in the video says, “The rights of men and women should be equal and sacred.”

Question: What rights and why are they sacred? Sacred to who? Are they always sacred or just for each person for themselves? Are the same rights sacred now and 100 years from now? Is it safe to say that human rights are an absolute? Perhaps, but according to Humanism’s own Icon, Robert G. Ingersoll:
When I became convinced that the universe is natural, that all the ghosts and gods are myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood the sense, the feeling, the joy of freedom. The walls of my prison crumbled and fell. The dungeon was flooded with light and all the bolts and bars and manacles became dust. I was no longer a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world, not even in infinite space. I was free-free to think, to express my thoughts-free to live my own ideal, free to live for myself and those I loved, free to use all my faculties, all my senses, free to spread imagination's wings, free to investigate, to guess and dream and hope, free to judge and determine for myself . . . I was free! I stood erect and fearlessly, joyously faced all worlds.
But if each of us is truly free to judge and determine for ourselves, as Ingersoll himself claims, then how can a Humanist communicate in absolute terms by asserting rights and sacred relationships? Who decides? According to Ingersoll, each of us decides for ourselves. What if all of the men in the world just decided that women should be submissive and make sandwiches? Why should I care whether a woman wants to vote or not? I’m just going to be worm food when I die anyway so there’s no really accountability for my actions.

Nonsense. When a person says to me that there are no absolutes, my question to them is whether they have contemplated suicide lately (borrowed from R.C. Sproul). Making assertions against the absolute is a meaningless endeavor.

Think about it…

How's my posting? Please direct all concerns and inquiries to DCSBN's chief content manager, Hollywood, via PM.
  Send a message via AIM to  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2010 by DCSportbikes.net. DCSportbikes.net is owned by End of Time Studios, LLC.