No. Just shows they're ignorant, and willfully so.
But then that's religion in a nut shell.
Being offended is unhealthy and unnecessary. If you are going to buck the crowd you know in advance that you’ll get flak from some quarters.
I suppose a person could make a big whoop-de-doo over being different and superior just for ego purposes, and in that case, being offended would certainly be useful in keeping the ego cauldron boiling.
I do not call myself an atheist, but my opinion is that morality is purely subjective. A good person is one who acts as I wish him to act—an evil person does what I don’t like.
Actually, IMO good and evil are not opposites. Evil exists only in imagination, while good has true essence, and permeates the universe.
@OroLee Well said. You are probably right.
Not offended, no. However, it does bother me that, Christians especially (or maybe I think primarily of them since they are so influential and there are so many of them in the US), feel they own the moral high ground. I believe there is a small fraction of Christians who truly believe and who honestly try to live a "godly" life, following the commandments, etc. That said, I believe the majority of them are complete hypocrites. The spew their "morality" and then break all their own rules. The reality is that everyone has morals. Everyone has their own moral standard. There are bad people in the world with "bad" morals, who don't respect the general, common-sense behaviors of society, many of which are enshrined in law (murder, theft, assault are all illegal except in self-defense). Christians and Atheists exist across the spectrum of morality (good & bad). I feel that the percentage of actual "good" Atheists might be higher because Atheists at least give thought to what they are doing. Many religious people are kept in check by their fear of divine punishment. Morality is a subjective thing and the religious do not have a monopoly on "good morals."
Yes. Especially considering how immoral some of their books/teachings tend to be... I actually got into an argument with a prof in university about how morals aren't static, and how they actually evolve with society... he vehemently disagreed... And when I brought up examples he just ended the conversation... Like it was morally acceptable for royalty to marry in family because they had to keep the blood pure...
When someone tells me what their religious beliefs are (from avowed atheist to kooky fundamentalist) they tell me nothing about their morality. The two seem to be totally unrelated. If anything my atheist friends are more humane than my religious ones.
Same here.
I do object to the "holier than thou" attitude some theists hold over non-believers because it is so obviously unfounded. Morality finds many of its tenets in the foundations of the biological blueprints for survival of whichever species. Just because someone wrote it in a book doesn't make it their property alone. Indeed so many immoral acts have been committed down the centuries in the name of theism that they should perhaps apologise instead of berate?
No, they exist inside the bubble of their traditional paradigm. Unless a person expends the personal effort to expand and try to burst that bubble you cannot really expect them even to see out of it.
That is part of why it is important to speak up, it is like sticking your head into that bubble and letting them know the world is bigger than they currently think.
But the bubble is their refuge...
Not really, I don’t value their opinions and I see a lack of morality from them, also. I don’t care what they think.
Not really.
Theists believe there's a great, invisible sky-fairy who watches you masturbate, listens to your thoughts, sends you to eternal torment in the fire-pits of hell, and sends hurricanes to 'punish' homosexuals.
In short they have such a poor grasp of reality that such a person saying I can have no morals is like being insulted by a gerbil - it means absolutely nothing.
Don't forget: it gets angry if you eat shrimp
No, I don't believe being offended is a means by which anything changes or gets accomplished. When one gets offended the conversation stops. I find it laughable when they are pressed on the subject. "Do you believe christians are the only ones with morals? When they answer yes. I follow up with "Then you believe that 5 billion people live non-morally?" At least it hopefully gets them thinking.
I must live in a bubble because no one spouts to me about their religion and yes, I do have Catholic, protestant, Jewish friends. If someone outside my group or people I don't know are ranting on Facebook or editorials about how Christians are the only people with morals, I ignore them. I am not going to waste my time dealing with their illogic logic. Why try to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. At this stage of my life I pick my battles wisely.
Offensive? No. I think it’s not thought out at best and intellectually dishonest at worst, but not offensive. We see foundational moral structures in pack animals, and tribes that predate known religion had moral systems without scripture to guide them. If anything, religion holds morality back. Morality is fluid. We are supposed to be constantly improving. Religion with strict dogma forces it’s participants to hang on to outdated mores because it’s recorded in a book. So no, it’s not offensive. It’s sad.
Nah, I don't care what those idiots think.
Lol
Yes! It’s as if they are calling us immoral when the evidence leans towards the reverse.