tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post5023291779646985161..comments2024-03-22T06:22:08.010+00:00Comments on Stephen Law: Article by Giles Fraser: "Why don’t humanists give value to humans?"Stephen Lawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-28525688658312073462009-10-16T08:11:14.867+00:002009-10-16T08:11:14.867+00:00Thanks for comments, Bill. Why do Christians griev...Thanks for comments, Bill. Why do Christians grieve was feature of another post, in fact:<br /><br />http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2008/11/book-club-god-delusion-chpt-10.htmlStephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-26430102576513182642009-10-15T05:10:21.490+00:002009-10-15T05:10:21.490+00:00I have been trawling your website for the last few...I have been trawling your website for the last few days, having just discovered it. I am assuming that you will get to read these comments as some point...<br /><br />This is a particularly interesting point for me. Life to me is absolutely worth sustaining no matter what; the alternative just doesn't bear thinking about. People look at me funny when I suggest I would much rather have my consciousness uploaded into a computer, rather than die and be snuffed out for good.<br /><br />The question I always look for an answer to is, why do Christians grieve? If their love one is safe in the bosom of Jesus, they should be rejoicing.<br /><br />Of course, the church's prohibition against suicide/euthanasia is entirely to combat the rush to the Pearly Gates you would otherwise have, having sold the fairy tale of everlasting bliss.<br /><br />I went to a funeral recently. The deceased was distressingly too young (43 - heart attack claimed him). The funeral made me angry. Rather than celebrating my friend (it did a little bit, of course), they spent most of the time celebrating God and Jesus and saying how wonderful they are that they give us life. The death was spoken as a 'transformation'. I wanted to jump up and scream that there was no 'transformation', just a permanent 'cessation'.<br /><br />Death to me is one of the cruelest 'evils' of this world; proof of our biological nature; and something that we should be doing everything to combat.<br /><br />The church of course just believes that it is God's Will and, if some scientist was to come up with the elixir for permanent youth, they would rail against it and try to impose their views upon me, thus preventing me the choice to use it. They would continue to condemn humans to an unnecessary and awful death; yet at the same time saying they value human life.<br /><br />Yet, I, as an atheist, don't value life?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15394024402072845444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-4683230858892614122008-10-26T22:45:00.000+00:002008-10-26T22:45:00.000+00:00So, as usual, they claim that God values human lif...So, as usual, they claim that God values human life, more so than humans do. Hmm...so why did he kill his son, again? An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being could not come up with a better solution than death? If that's the case, Christians should be recommending death for everyone, young and old alike! We are all "sinners" on some level, and it's clearly the method God prefers!<BR/>I am always astounded at what religious people consider to be logical, and I like your reply.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-1941478865742453442008-10-26T22:05:00.000+00:002008-10-26T22:05:00.000+00:00Ophelia - "We want them to fuck off and mind their...Ophelia - "We want them to fuck off and mind their own business." I certainly couldn't have put that better!Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-22999580698711214192008-10-26T21:58:00.000+00:002008-10-26T21:58:00.000+00:00Thanks anon - yes you are right it should be "us"....Thanks anon - yes you are right it should be "us". Bit sloppy.Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-90854101473785392352008-10-26T21:34:00.000+00:002008-10-26T21:34:00.000+00:00Give it up, Giles! "Life" is what you eat for brea...Give it up, Giles! "Life" is what you eat for breakfast.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-52387911778372916812008-10-26T20:29:00.000+00:002008-10-26T20:29:00.000+00:00Mr. Law: While you're revising your post, change t...Mr. Law: While you're revising your post, change the second and the last use of 'we' to 'us'. In each case, you need the objective case, not the nominative case, because the pronoun is the object of a preposition ('between' and 'about', respectively). Shameful English, unfortunately.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-65610941474032265572008-10-26T17:37:00.000+00:002008-10-26T17:37:00.000+00:00I wrote a post a week ago about this very subject ...I wrote <A HREF="http://www.butterfliesandwheels.com/notesarchive.php?id=2474" REL="nofollow">a post</A> a week ago about this very subject of the putative moral high ground. I concluded in my usual temperate and polite way...<BR/><BR/>"Assisted suicide for the <I>terminally ill</I> no more cheapens or demeans life than gay marriage cheapens or demeans marriage. Catholics want to force unwilling people to suffer at the hands of a torturing god - and they think they are Better People for doing so. Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum, as Lucretius so wisely put it."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-54967717901053817882008-10-26T14:19:00.000+00:002008-10-26T14:19:00.000+00:00A Christian lady rang my doorbell this morning off...A Christian lady rang my doorbell this morning offering me a tract and said "Would you like to know the truth?" Refusing politely, I said "I think I know it already, thank you very much."<BR/><BR/>These folk really are a pain in the posterior.anticanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18135207107619114891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-83733367177187883582008-10-26T13:40:00.000+00:002008-10-26T13:40:00.000+00:00I think your insult at the end was quite on tune. ...I think your insult at the end was quite on tune. Apart from anything else, his whole letter was insulting. Now, of course, one needs to respond to the content of the letter and that you did quite accurately but one of its features is that it is also insulting, specifically an insult without merit.I see no reason not to pass an insult back provided, unlike his, it is one with a valid foundation, which it is, given your valid criticism of his content. <BR/><BR/>It is not just an insult but a realistic characterisation of how we see him - based on his letter. I, for one, see many of these religious moralistic claims, where the perpetrator thinks they are taking the moral high ground, as them actually taking the moral low ground and they need to be challenged on this particular point, at least so their audience can see and consider this.Martin Freedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16952072422175870627noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-61941726207246915562008-10-26T11:28:00.000+00:002008-10-26T11:28:00.000+00:00Christians often claim they would die for their fa...Christians often claim they would die for their faith.<BR/><BR/>I'm sure they value their lives less than their faith.Steven Carrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11983601793874190779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-26429507801593234052008-10-26T11:25:00.000+00:002008-10-26T11:25:00.000+00:00How many times must Christians say their god can k...How many times must Christians say their god can kill anybody before Giles Fraser realises which belief system really values humans?Steven Carrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11983601793874190779noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-9500211115861332542008-10-26T10:57:00.000+00:002008-10-26T10:57:00.000+00:00Thanks. Here's my effort:So Giles Fraser holds suc...Thanks. Here's my effort:<BR/><BR/>So Giles Fraser holds such high principles that he is willing to make others suffer for them. Oh, how nice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-91601687321062754742008-10-26T09:57:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:57:00.000+00:00oh I see - sorry. It wasletters@churchtimes.co.ukoh I see - sorry. It was<BR/><BR/>letters@churchtimes.co.ukStephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-14042986261554529032008-10-26T09:54:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:54:00.000+00:00Stephen, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant which CT em...Stephen, sorry I wasn't clear. I meant which CT email did you address your letter to. There are several on their website and none are obviously dedicated to readers' letters.<BR/><BR/>Fraser's article sickened me, and I want to have my say!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-22545193950896835102008-10-26T09:53:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:53:00.000+00:00Having thought about it I do agree with Peter - be...Having thought about it I do agree with Peter - better not to include the insult. So I've pulled the last two lines.<BR/><BR/>Of course they probably won't use it in any case....Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-5635622881835131422008-10-26T09:43:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:43:00.000+00:00Incidentally, I think the first point I make is im...Incidentally, I think the first point I make is important. Would Fraser say that, if it turned out there's no God, he would consider humans worthless? It seems Fraser, and Christians like him, must say that, astonishingly. When they see a child suffering, and feel this is something terrible, they only feel that because they think there's a God up there? If there's no God, well, hey, why should they care?Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-74398406193631573982008-10-26T09:13:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:13:00.000+00:00Thanks for link Kype P - interesting argument, yes...Thanks for link Kype P - interesting argument, yes.<BR/><BR/>I used the RIP email address - why?Stephen Lawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02167317543994731177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-46477374456946556682008-10-26T09:01:00.000+00:002008-10-26T09:01:00.000+00:00Stephen, which email address did you use to write ...Stephen, which email address did you use to write to the CT letters page?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16697418550026370497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-55026236437943335242008-10-26T07:48:00.000+00:002008-10-26T07:48:00.000+00:00Stephen, why are you “afraid” that Fraser’s God do...Stephen, why are you “afraid” that Fraser’s God doesn’t exist? His article is the usual Christian twaddle about euthanasia. The core of their objection is that they have such a low view of human nature they believe that if euthanasia or assisted suicide was legalised all doctors would behave like Bodkin Adams or Harold Shipman, and all relatives would hasten a sick person’s death in order to get their hands on their money and property.<BR/><BR/>The inconsistency of the Christian attitude to death never ceases to amaze me. If they really believed that the life to come is so much better than this one, they should all be tumbling over one another to see who can get there first. However, they claim to value life on earth more highly than non-believers, and seek to interfere with others’ choices about their own deaths, while Christianity has throughout history been responsible for millions of religious murders in the name of Christ. All very odd! But then, it is futile to expect logical thinking or behaviour from religious persons.anticanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18135207107619114891noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-60554395992247011012008-10-26T06:34:00.000+00:002008-10-26T06:34:00.000+00:00Good reply. The Daniel James case is local to me (...Good reply. The Daniel James case is local to me (Worcester). Some of the coverage suggests that his quality of life reached the stage where he made the decision to die level-headedly and with the support of his family. His mother has spoken to the local paper about the anguish that is being caused commentators using the case to push their own moral agenda. There is also the social worker who referred the matter to the police despite having never met either Daniel or his family.Tobyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002670042232124072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-15821802443236221042008-10-26T03:03:00.000+00:002008-10-26T03:03:00.000+00:00Sorry, should have elaborated more. In that post, ...Sorry, should have elaborated more. In that post, someone responds to John's formulation of the argument from suffering. I think you've already responded to the argument that he's using, but it would be interesting to rehash it.Kyle Szklenskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03837443487933011691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-16016370656214469592008-10-26T02:44:00.000+00:002008-10-26T02:44:00.000+00:00I like the response overall. I even liked the insu...I like the response overall. I even liked the insult! :)<BR/><BR/>Here's an argument you might be interested in, Stephen:<BR/><A HREF="https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=21219785&postID=4082921936961283049" REL="nofollow">Debunking Christianity</A>Kyle Szklenskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03837443487933011691noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1905686568472747305.post-17471289819535561662008-10-26T00:09:00.000+00:002008-10-26T00:09:00.000+00:00Good response Stephen! Giles Fraser doesn't reall...Good response Stephen! Giles Fraser doesn't really mount any serious argument as to why atheists/humanists cannot account for ethical value. Shame about your cheap insult in the last line though. It spoils it.<BR/><BR/>PeterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com