Conversation Between SharmaK and Epic

No, problem - take your time. Good luck in class!

Just wanted to let you know that I do intend to jump back in to the atheist morality thread, I'm just kind of busy with RL now that University is starting up.

Just wanted to let you know that I do intend to jump back in to the atheist morality thread, I'm just kind of busy with RL now that University is starting up.

I'll try and do better:

Why I can lump religions together - I've restated it differently but it basically boils down to religions have immutable foundations which are like built in mechanisms to resist change.
Why the Icelandic example was invalid - the big deal was that the President was gay not because she was a woman.
The last section is an explanation of why I think that secular, non-deity driven moral frameworks are more effective in embracing change and I think I explain that part better in my reply to Apo. Namely, secular frameworks can change whereas religious ones, generally cannot.

I read your reply in the atheist morality thread and I'm having a bit of trouble understanding the points you're trying to make. I will say that I'm rather tired and I'll take another go at it tomorrow when I'm rested and see if it makes more sense then, but I just figured I'd give you a heads-up in case it isn't just me. It seems like you were rambling in the way that my previous sentence did (now that I look back over it). Cheers!

No problem, you'll almost definitely have a reply before saturday.

Oh yeah, you're right. Sorry. I think I got distracted with that other thread about the tea-baggers. I'll get to it!

You didn't reply to anything beyond the hypocrisy charges and you said you would address the other points later that day. I have been waiting for you to address those other points before I make any other replies.

Epic, I did reply on the 28th. I just assumed that you were bowing out of it.

Just a reminder that you yet to respond to the rest of my points in the atheist morality thread. Looking forward to reading and being challenged by some strong rebuttals. Cheers!