What would you say if I did this?:
But it boils down to this. It's natural (rape), but you don't like it, so that makes you define it as unnatural because you assume your judgment on the issue is perfect.
Is that fair or unfair?
Is empathy really such a foreign concept to you? How is it that, every time
you manufacture one of these 'gotcha' moral questions, you always seem to fail to consider the effects of the action on others.
"Oh, in atheist morality land, why is what Hitler did bad?"
"Oh, in atheist morality land, why is rape bad?"
"Oh, in atheist morality land, why is murder bad?"
Well, in atheist morality land, we make considerations for the detriment and suffering of others damn it
! The reason why masturbation isn't immoral in atheist morality land is because it's an action that doesn't hurt anyone
. The reason why homosexual consensual sex isn't immoral in atheist morality land is because it's an action that doesn't hurt anyone
. The reason why rape
is immoral in atheist morality land is because someone is getting f*cking hurt
. The reason that Hitlers actions were immoral in atheist morality land is because someone was getting f*cking hurt
. The reason that murder is immoral in atheist morality land is because someone is getting f*cking hurt
"Oh, but what about killing someone to save your own life and the lives of countless others? Why isn't that
immoral in atheist morality land, huh Mr. Smart Atheist?"
Look...I know that morality would be a whole heck of a lot easier if you could just look up the answer in the back of the book for any situation. I know that it's sort of a pain in the ass
to have to, you know, assess any given situation and accept that fact that moral choices are not always black and white. I know that it kind of sucks to have to spend time thinking
about the ramifications and results of an action on others.
But, for crying out loud, questions on morality necessarily
entail incorporating the subjective response of subjective entities
- be it the victims, the perpetrators, the witnesses, or those indirectly affected by actions. Yet you
seem hell bent on ignoring
that aspect, and it's making you come across as lacking empathy. And sometimes making a moral evaluation of an action is tough
- after all, we're fallible creatures with access to only imperfect information, and I realize that sucks, but thems the breaks.