Agreed. I've found none. Its absurd that Christians like to pretend they have some moral high standard when they claim to get those morals from a god who explicitly condones rape, slavery, ethnic genocide, racism, etc for the first half of it's book.
Additionally, I've heard the claim that they could have no morals without religion.
If the only thing keeping them under control is their religion--rather than a solid ethical base from which to develop a good social morality--then I don't want these people near my wallet, dogs, garden, or aging parents.
I don't see anything morally sound about those teachings. I have a more sound moral compass than the Christian god by far. I've never created a child then built a place to torture it and said I'm going to torture you for eternity if you don't believe in something you have no evidence for, save yourself by believing it and worshipping it relentlessly.
Most people never do realize that I may disbelieve (actually, I'm an agnostic so I simply withhold judgement) for perhaps 80 years, but somehow infinite punishment is appropriate for this supposed "crime."
Let's evaluate that. Infinite punishment is the correct response to a finite "crime."
Can you tell me the ethical problem with that statement? (I knew you could!)
It pleases me that there is no evidence any such being exists.
Some claim to have evidence, but are usually loathe to present it. When presented, it tends to be anecdotal at best, and usually gathered during a period when the person's mental stability is questionable.
I class all near-death "experiences" in both categories. One's mind is never more stressed than when one is dying--and yet nobody talks about the incredibly high percentage of people who see nothing.
For this reason, drug addicts and alcoholics hitting bottom are not valid evidence as well. Both are most definitely neurologically active.
