I recently watched TAE and was wondering why Matt bothers to argue for somethings that does not exist, that is secular morality. Moral reasoning is not secular, religious, or anything in between like there is no white or black thinking. Then to top it off, Matt denies being a nihilist, but you would think that a person that espouse logical reasoning would be consistent in the case of atheism. All atheists are nihilists, at least in the existential sense. Now, if he says he is an absurdist he then is deluding himself that his morality counts for anything. I think atheists like Matt defend this so-called secular morality so theists do not use that tired and illogical assertion that atheists are evil, bad, or immoral. Who cares? I am not trying to live up to their standards or any others for that matter. I am sick of atheists like Hitchens and Harris always trying to get the moral high ground. To me they are cowards that need to hide behind arbitrary and deluded ethics. Is their any difference between the theocracy that Hitchens hates and a set ethical standard?
Follow us on:
ACA members! It's time to renew your ACA membership. You can do so online if you log in and then click here or check your e-mail for alternate instructions. Thanks for supporting the ACA.