- Dec 9, 2002
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
In "The Genesis Solution" Ken Ham says that the Bible (and a literal Genesis) is the foundation for wearing clothes and being against homosexuality (God didn't make "Adam and Steve"). It says that evolution justifies racist views, divorce, abortion, and relativistic morality.
Are you saying that, aside from your religion, you have no reason to be against homosexuality, racism, divorce, and abortion? Unless there's a god, those things aren't wrong?
So promoting Creationism can have moral reasons so that you have a strong foundation when trying to promote Biblical values like being against homosexuality, and men being the spiritual head of the family. So that gives Christians more reasons to support Creation science....
No, that doesn't work.
If you believed that homosexuality was actually wrong (not just magically wrong according to your religion) then you could say that religions which oppose homosexuality are (in that way, at least) good. That would make sense.
But it makes no sense to say, "There's nothing wrong with homosexuality. But some religions oppose homosexuality, so we should support those religions. Otherwise, we'd have no reason to oppose homosexuality -- which would be great, since then we wouldn't have to persecute gays."
That's not a great argument. It's a stay off my side quality argument.
Maybe that illustration isn't clear to people who are prejudiced against homosexuality, so let's put the shoe on the other foot:
Suppose somebody presented you with this argument: "Christianity is fine. There's nothing logical to be said against it. So therefore we should all support Islam. Otherwise, we would have no reason to oppose Christianity."
Would that fly? Would you find that argument persuasive?
You should find it persuasive, because it's the same logic you use when you say that we should believe in the Christian gods because otherwise we'd have no reason to oppose homosexuality.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with homosexuality, divorce, and abortion. So you see how your argument strikes me. "Unless you believe in gods, you can't want people trapped in unhappy marriages to have to stay trapped. Unless you believe in gods, you won't want to force people to have children when they don't want to. And, unless you believe in gods, you won't be able to get properly irate about boys kissing. Therefore, you should believe in gods."
That falls flat. It utterly fails.
Racism, on the other hand, is actually bad: It has a strong tendency to increase human misery. So I don't need to believe in gods to oppose racism.
In fact, if you told me that I should believe in goblins so I can be more against racism, I'd think you were out of your tree. What do gods and goblins have to do with morality?
Are you against human trafficking? Would you be more against it if you believed in fairies? Would believing in fairies, and basing your moral arguments on the existence of fairies, help you persuade other people to be against human trafficking?
No, it wouldn't.
Unless you have some actual logical reason to oppose something, you have no reason to want to believe in gods so that you can oppose that thing. And if you do have logical reasons to oppose something, then believing in gods won't help justify your opposition.