If you believe in evolution, Donald Sterling didn’t go far enough.

Episode 1383

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Daily Clips and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to If you believe in evolution, Donald Sterling didn’t go far enough.

  1. Infernaltank says:

    wow. just wow.

    let’s see:

    1. social darwinism =/= evolution. the two things are completely different. evolution says nothing about how people should act.
    2. saying “well god says so” doesn’t solve your problem at all. if i were to steal something that belongs to you, and you said “stealing is wrong!” i could just as easily say, “so what?”. putting god in the front doesn’t solve anything. it just creates a different problem for you. just because god says something is good, doesn’t make it good. it’s still subjective.

  2. jasonjshaw says:

    Big issue there – if someone tries to obliterate everyone who they don’t see as quality people, even more people feel threatened and turn against that person.

    We are a social animal, and not confined to small groups anymore. This argument neglects these things.

  3. wesinid says:

    We have prisons for a reason. People who break the law are separated from the rest of society. It has been determined those people are a threat to society, and limiting or eliminating society’s exposure to them will make society safer and better. Prevent such people from having the chance to procreate. But that isn’t working so well, is it? Maybe we need science and governments to intervene sooner to prevent certain peoples from being able to contaminate society.

    “Evolution says nothing about how people should act.” But if you are an atheist, you have to try to explain how morals and ethics evolved.

    “We are a social animal” but we really only need the benefits of small groups to survive. It’s only because we’ve outgrown ecosystem and invented so much unnecessary crap that we now are dependent on a larger society to satisfy our needs. Since we are just animals, why should we think we need anything more than birds, fish, lions, or bears to live life? As a “social animal” we sure seem determined to kill and subject other people on a regular basis.

    • qwe says:

      @Wesinid one naturalistic fallacy after another

      “Since we are just animals, why should we think we need anything more than birds, fish, lions, or bears to live life?”
      because we cant

      • wesinid says:

        But if evolution is truth, we did once, so shouldn’t we be able to still. Perhaps there is something in my DNA that evolution instilled the compulsion in me to need DirecTV, Shell nitrogen enriched gasoline, Taco Bell, and Izod brand clothing.

      • qwe says:

        “But if evolution is truth, we did once, so shouldn’t we be able to still. ”
        no we shouldn’t because we evolved pass that, and Todd made one naturalistic fallacy after another in this video, as well showing that he doesnt think hurting people is enough to consider something bad or wrong

  4. wesinid says:

    Only bad atheists think killing and hurting others is wrong. They only think so because they are stesling the idea from religions that have taught such things in the past. Life has no meaning. If it did have meaning we wouldn’t support abortions and celebrate lifestyles that degrade human dignity.

    • qwe says:

      no only good athiests think killing and hurting others is bad. and there is no dignity if christanity is true because you are all just hell-fodder anyways

    • physics says:

      Meh. Religions have taught that idea because they have stolen it from the need for coherent human relationships in order to survive as the gregarious animals that we are.

      • Indeed, physics. Actually, I personally don’t mind if the religious borrow from the humanistic worldview, as long as they don’t claim it’s their invention. Handsome is as handsome does: I wonder why Todd doesn’t get that?

  5. physics says:

    1. Being an atheist does not mean that you “believe” in evolution.
    2. Even when an atheist “believes” in evolution, he/she does not have to explain how moral/ethics evolved.
    3. Even when an atheist “believes” in evolution, he/she does not have to know if moral/ethics evolved. All an atheist needs to understand is human relationships.
    4. Knowing about a natural process does not mean that you have to guide your actions and behaviour to follow that natural process. I’m quite sure that lots of Christians “believe” in gravitation as much as many atheists. Yet, none is saying that we should therefore push people down precipices.
    5. When a creationist declares that something is wrong because some imaginary being that they call “God” said so, all the creationists is saying is that creationists find no value in human life except when commanded so. That’s no ethics, that’s mere cowardice.

    Creationists argue in self-refuting circles.

    • wesinid says:

      “All an atheist needs to understand is human relationships.” Apparently understanding them with the intent to destroy is the primary purpose. Which makes sense, because everything is going to pass away, so why should I care whose life I screw up in the meantime. I can go have sex with whoever I want and not have to care about how their chemical imbalances make them incapable of coping with the meaninglessness of the act.

      • Tony Jiang says:

        @Wesinid it quite obvious why you are just strawmanning because you lost

      • Physics says:

        Apparently understanding them with the intent to destroy is the primary purpose.

        That such is your primary purpose does not mean that it is everybody’s primary purpose.

        I can go have sex …

        I would point out that such action is far from being based on an understanding of human relationships. But I rather note that you don’t do that because you’re afraid of your celestial imaginary friend, and you dare calling that “morality.”

        It’s ironic how Christians come to these discussion thinking that they have a winning hand in terms of morality, only to reveal themselves as nihilist sociopaths afraid of that imaginary being that they call “God.”

  6. wesinid says:

    Why do you judge me? I am a free moral agent. I can do what I want. What gives you the right to judge me? you are a hypocrite

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s