Dan Barker v Jon Kaus: Can We Be Good Without God?

Dan Barker and Jon Kaus debated Can We Be Good Without God at Gustavus Adolphus college in St Peter MN Sunday night, and I’ve got to say, Dan Barker killed it.

Jon does know the boiler plate apologetic arguments, but I’ve gotta say, his inexperience and belief in a deity as a source of morality let him down.

When asserting that all morals are derived from god of some sort, you simply must give some sort of backing for that position. A simple chart of moral behaviors by god believers v non-god believers could have done this (hypothetically. The evidence actually supports the opposite assertion). I did have some hopes for Jon being a kindler gentler sort of apologist at the beginning, but by the end he had justified all the slaughters of the Old Testament, and simultaneously asserted that god’s word was unchanging, and that it changed with the coming of the New Testament. Talk about moral relativism!

The more I hear apologists speak about morals, the more I am convinced that they are, at the core, sociopathic. They seem to lack any basic empathy for their fellow human beings, and seek only to serve a god. Jon emphasized during the rebuttals that the glorification of god is more important than human life. Basically, I see no difference between them and any other cult member.

Explore posts in the same categories: Superstition in the Modern World


You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

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

%d bloggers like this: