What Atheists Can't Answer
By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
Page A17 Washington Post

   " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
   clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
   uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
   other less desirable traits.

   So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
   good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
   millennia, has given one answer: We should
   cultivate the better angels of our nature because
   the God we love and respect requires it. While many
   of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.

   Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
   cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
   because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
   your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
   wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
   be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
   hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
   going to do whatever I please."  "

Consider, Mr. Gerson:

If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
then there would be no prisons. There are, and
consider, further, that the most religious (at least
professing to be) group in this country is the two
million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.

But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
--who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
enough to remove any convictions you might have had
about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
evil nature."

Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
their God requires it are only setting themselves up
for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
their congregations that God wants them to fight this
or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
possessions (and raping their women and children
before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).

But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
then that is a certain sign that such children live in
a warped and perverted society or family.

The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
better not get caught doing it.

Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
still does not know the difference between Good and
Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
and tell them.

S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3s.sdrodrian.com

All religions are local.
Only science is universal.

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland

On Jul 14, 10:40 pm, sdr  wrote:
> What Atheists Can't Answer
> By Michael Gerson Friday, July 13, 2007;
> Page A17 Washington Post
>
>    " Human nature, in other circumstances, is also
>    clearly constructed for cruel exploitation,
>    uncontrollable rage, icy selfishness and a range of
>    other less desirable traits.
>
>    So the dilemma is this: How do we choose between
>    good and bad instincts? Theism, for several
>    millennia, has given one answer: We should
>    cultivate the better angels of our nature because
>    the God we love and respect requires it. While many
>    of us fall tragically short, the ideal remains.
>
>    Atheism provides no answer to this dilemma. It
>    cannot reply: "Obey your evolutionary instincts"
>    because those instincts are conflicted. "Respect
>    your brain chemistry" or "follow your mental
>    wiring" don't seem very compelling either. It would
>    be perfectly rational for someone to respond: "To
>    hell with my wiring and your socialization, I'm
>    going to do whatever I please."  "
>
> Consider, Mr. Gerson:
>
> If it were the case that religion is our instructor,
> then there would be no prisons. There are, and
> consider, further, that the most religious (at least
> professing to be) group in this country is the two
> million criminals in our prisons. 'Nouf said.
>
> But if you still think that morality/ethics is in any
> way/shape/form associated with religious belief, then
> but think about the depravity of priests and preachers
> --who have been caught. Shouldn't that, at least, be
> enough to remove any convictions you might have had
> about religious instruction "bettering" our "naturally
> evil nature."
>
> Further: People who think they should be good BECAUSE
> their God requires it are only setting themselves up
> for the most evil preacher's definition of The Good.
> Time and time again we have seen preachers "inform"
> their congregations that God wants them to fight this
> or that war (Confederate preachers urged their
> congregations to kill as many Yankees as possible), or
> to butcher and plunder this or that people (in the
> best of Islamic traditions, Turkish preachers told
> their congregations that murdering Armenians for their
> possessions (and raping their women and children
> before slaughtering them) was what God expected of
> them... and because acknowledging this monstrous truth
> about Islam before the whole world is so impossible,
> the Turks to this day refuse to acknowledge that the
> Armenian/Muslim genocide even ever took place).
>
> But I don't have to prove to any parent that we are
> ALL born with unfettered instincts--to be "bettered"
> by the (sometimes even the most casual & offhand)
> instructions of our parents and societies: Every child
> KNOWS the difference between good and evil (deeds) by
> the time he/she is four or five. And if they don't,
> then that is a certain sign that such children live in
> a warped and perverted society or family.
>
> The four-year-old who does "evil" may not yet know how
> to "get away with it," but he certainly knows he had
> better not get caught doing it.
>
> Therefore, if there be man or woman on this earth who
> still does not know the difference between Good and
> Evil... let them inquire of any (as-yet religiously-
> uninstructed) four-year-old: for he will surely know,
> and tell them.
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://poems.sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3s.sdrodrian.com
>
> All religions are local.
> Only science is universal.



I'm an existentialist. Born without meaning or purpose, We make are
own meaning and purpose. Obviously,
the basic instincts play a role here.

Michael Ragland