Without God you can’t have objective morality and without objective morality the world is a nihilistic depressing...

What if objective morality is anchored around the laws of physics and traits of cognition.
I don't anything more objective the laws of physics.

Ethics based on first principle philosophy completely replace the need for god(s) looking over your shoulder.
Morality is for people who need an invisible friend. Ethics are for mature adults who see the world with open eyes.

This is objective morality. Morality is actually encoded into our very existence, just like gravity, or thermodynamics.

This
youtube.com/watch?v=hd09dWD0LiA&t=226s
then this
youtube.com/watch?v=nLE-OaBvyTs
then this
youtube.com/watch?v=ChgCh2Gui5M

It’s pretty sure that’s basically the point of ethical monotheism, that morality is a natural property like a law of physics.

There's no such thing as morality.

Law of the jungle is everything. Which is why Whites will go extinct for being so ignorant and pathetic towards their very survival.

Jews invented atheism tho

"Jews," are the most amoral people on earth. The world's abortion doctors, pornographers, gay pride paraders and worse.

Jesus is going to slaughter them at the last battle. I just hope I'm there to see it happen.

If morality is objective then it can be described by a single person, a judge if you will, and I’m pretty sure that person who is judge would not be that guy.

Amniotic sac, retard.

What is irony. They didn’t though, that’s an absurd statement considering the pagan world is by definition atheistic.

Morality
>don’t intentionally cause harm to someone who’s innocent
There you go, no god required.

Judaism has changed through time and is divided into many sects with different moral values. Do you think it's the hassidic jews that control the media? China has survived for longer than jews with a totally different set of religions. What is your point?

>without objective morality the world is a nihilistic depressing shit hole
i disagree

Needs a definition of innocent / judge of innocent

Jews aren’t going extinct and their religion isn’t law of the jungle.

Horseshit. You atheists don't have a moral code of any kind. You just make it up as you go along. Subject to change, on any whim that crosses your degenerate mind at any given moment. Entirely situational. Entirely subject to you mood at the time.

You dont need God to create your own objective morality, brainlet. In the absense of God you becone the sole dictator of your own reality

Someone that has not done wrong (stolen, murdered, etc.) to you or others to justify retribution.

If it was an observable law of nature don't you think we would be forced to abide by it? Why can we have different moral values if morality is a natural law?

Jews will be fine. But Whites won't be, well Whites will be fine because they won't even exist, which is better than what will make them cease to exist in the coming 50 years.

>In the placenta
>Suggests others are retarded

>Don't intentionally cause harm to someone who's innocent

>Don't
Why shouldn't I?

>intentionally
Why is it okay to cause harm to someone accidentally?

>cause harm
How do you know if an action causes harm? What if the cause of the harm is general or difficult to pinpoint? What if the harm comes from encouraging others to perform behaviors that are harmful to themselves or those around them?

>to someone
What about their property or assets?

>who's innocent
What defines innocent? If I stole something once then put it back am I now fair game for systemic torture?

>What is your point?
The point is that if there is no true morality except that which can sustain itself as you say, then you are saying Judaism must be the truest morality out there.
>China
Morality had changed a bunch of times. They’ve never been concerned with objectivity.

You just made that up. And if I were to ask some other atheist, he'd give me some bullshit he just made up on the spot.

Just admit it. You don't have any moral code that doesn't vary from one moment to the next.

You need a religion to have a moral? So it means you are a subhuman without intelligence. Your life is worth nothing and you don't deserve to live.

>first principle philosophy
There is none, apart from God. “Don’t hurt others” isn’t doesn’t produce any differentiation between right from wrong except in your own head.

Need a definition of wrong and a judge of wrong.
You are assuming that these concepts have universal meaning. You're probably the type of person to be shocked to see that pakistanis actually believe women to be inferior to man, of a different species even.

It doesn’t take a fucking code carved in stone 3000 years ago to have some regard for your fellow man.

Which God? Zeus? Odin? Allah?

Objective morality LMAO

Yeah and what about your religion? they all change to adapt to the present. Why don't you stone homosexuals? it's in the bible you hypocrite

Ethics is behaving according to what other people demand of you.
Morals is behaving according to what you demand of yourself.

The first you will cheat at every opportunity, the latter you regret cheating.

How is it "newborn" if it's still in the sack?

>create your own objective morality

>In the absense of God you becone the sole dictator of your own reality
You know deep down that if it’s just you who is saying these things then it’s not real. Not least because you have no way of enforcing it and seeing justice handed out, but God does/would.

Attached: ABF293BB-7EEC-4A91-A690-9C15E845C9F7.png (485x433, 23.53K)

Where is proofs of these claims you make?

Everyone has done wrong at some point.

"Don't cause harm"
Why?
"Don't cause intentional harm"
>Muh accidental harm
If I deem someone to deserve it, why shouldn't I?
"Who's innocent"
What is innocence and by whose standards?
>There's no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

>You're probably the type of person to be shocked to see that pakistanis actually believe women to be inferior to man
I’m not, considering that’s been a belief of a large amount of countries, mine included, for centuries. Women viewed as equals is a new concept.
Definition of wrong: An act which causes harm to someone that has not caused harm to you or someone else.
Example: Beating up some random dude = wrong
Beating up the dude that attacked you out of nowhere = justified

I am saying that morality is a tool to force generations of humans to act in a way that has secured the previous generation. I don't believe that morality is anything more than a tradition used to protect the individuals of it's believers.

>don't you think we would be forced to abide by it?