Why are we not allowed to kill

[ICantSpellDawg]

This is rather insulting. You are insinuating that without believing in a god you don't find all these crimes wrong. It is like saying that if i.e you are a Catholic then you believe murder theft etc is right. It groups a whole group of people (Atheists) and makes an unsubstantiated accusation against them and their moral codes.

Apart from insulting it is, of course, very very wrong.

How? I'm not saying that you are a murderer, just that murder to you is simply something that shouldn't happen because of some social balance. You don't believe that there is some cosmic right or wrong or plan - just that some things are jerky to do.

I believe in both. In fact, I don't beleive that a religious or secular person is more or less likely to kill, just that the religious beleive that there are reasons beyond the temporal why we shouldn't kill one another.

Are you insulted because I've said that there is no logical reason why a human killing another human is any more wrong than a bear or shark killing a human, possibly in tandem with butcher knives strapped to their heads? Face it - Universal superlatives are not the atheists strong suit, unless they are confused.

Morality is only social pact to you, and "right" or "wrong" depends on your willingness to enter into that pact.

[rasoforos]

You assume that unless someone believes in God he will inherently be immoral and he will not let's say murder someone just because it will be socially damaging to the said person.

In other words it assumes that an Atheist would have no problem to murder people if he would benefit from it and there was no fear of punishment. This is a very common religious argument 'that people who dont believe in gods have no moral values'.

This is clearly wrong and offensive. Substitute 'Atheist' with your religious belief and you will see what I mean.

But apart from being wrong its also religion bashing. (Atheism being a religion according to the backroom rules).

I would like to stop this here. Maybe I cannot explain what I mean well enough.

[ICantSpellDawg]

You assume that unless someone believes in God he will inherently be immoral and he will not let's say murder someone just because it will be socially damaging to the said person.

In other words it assumes that an Atheist would have no problem to murder people if he would benefit from it and there was no fear of punishment. This is a very common religious argument 'that people who dont believe in gods have no moral values'.

This is clearly wrong and offensive. Substitute 'Atheist' with your religious belief and you will see what I mean.

But apart from being wrong its also religion bashing. (Atheism being a religion according to the backroom rules).

I would like to stop this here. Maybe I cannot explain what I mean well enough.

I don't beleive that they are more likely to do it (as I have said) - but I don't beleive that morality as it is traditionally understood exists without faith in the intangible.

So essentially there is no morality without the superlative that exists seperatly from the practical.

There is no morality for you - just agreement with others on policies - and we all know how much those matter. From your point of view there is also no morality for me either because my rationale is incorrect. Just because I was confused wouldn't mean that I was any more moral than you, you know?

So you take morality to be synonomous with social contracts. I take it to be synonomous with a divine plan. Your understanding is not universal where as mine is - yet those who adhere to humanist contractual morality constantly use universal rhetoric to lambast murder. I just don't get it.