Popular Posts

31 August, 2011

Morals? Last Follow up I Promise

After the rabbi did not respond To any of my later posts I got quite frustrated when I saw him trying to pull his fallacies over on other individuals commenting on his article. So I decided to put up a flash light point blank at these immoral fallacies he was trying to get away with and see if he would answer anymore of my questions which he has not. (because he can not) Here are some of the conversations:
Comment 1
I’m curious: exactly what is the “plea”?
That we accept his connect-the-dots and just start believing? Belief doesn’t work that way.
That we hypocritically claim to believe, for (as he sees it) the good of society? Is that the basis of his own belief?

  1. 1:41 pm
    Thanks for you question. My “plea’ is twofold.
    No matter what you believe write Singer, Marks, and B4U-ACT and let them know loud and clear that you are disgusted by any attempt to change the status of pedophilia. It is criminal and morally reprehensible.
    Re-evaluate your moral position in light of the fact that in objective reality from an atheistic view of things, there is nothing wrong with child molestation.

    1. 3:10 pm
      Don’t let the rabbi fool you by invoking irrelevant Scientific name like B4U ACT as Eric Pfeifer told the Rabbi it’s a red herring these organizations are trying to find a way to cure pedophiles From Eric Pfeifer “B4U-ACT even states that their goal with pedophile mental care is to “…give them hope for productive and fulfilling lives, rather than waiting for a crisis to occur.” The rabbi has not answered to this. Nor has he answered to the fact the pfeifer and I both have raised numerous times. the fact that for his argument to be a vaild one Atheists would all have to be psychopaths, more specifically, void of empathy which the overwhelming majority of human beings is not. (and those that are aren’t reproducing) Empathy is a chemical process in the brain and is not going to disappear simply by rejecting religion. The rabbi twists facts and interprets to support his views when in fact he has not answered to this argument crushing problem that we have brought up continuously. I sound like a broken record. REPLY
    1. 3:17 pm
      (**Overwhelming majority of Humans *are not) sorry about that REPLY
    1. 3:33 pm
      I also just read that he tried to slip in that these organizations/people are trying to CHANGE the status of pedophilia, yet another BLATANT lie from the rabbi’s endless supply to try and support his twisted argument. These individuals have only explained that, objectively, nothing can be absolute wrong or absolute right because there is no objective absolute moral basis. They aren’t advocating for pedophilia as the rabbi underhandedly tries to imply to you. Through empathy along with a very basic survival instinct we develop morals over time through a trial and error process that get more and more complex. You can see varying degrees of moral complexity in more socially complex animal societies and less socially complex animal societies. It’s quite easy to grasp the question is (to take from one of his own titles): Why Doesn’t the Rabbi get It? REPLY
Comment 2
If atheism is so bad, and atheistic societies are so bad, would you care to explain WHY in more atheistic Western societies they have:
*LOWER rates of STD infection.
*LOWER rates of violent crime.
*LOWER rates of murder.
*LOWER rates of teenage pregnancies.
*LOWER rates of child and adult mortality.
*LOWER rates of abortion.

And more besides.
Please do explain why the most religious Western nation (the USA) has millions of abortions, STDs, murders, etc. each year, while in Sweden (where 80% are atheist) abortions, STD rates and murders are virtually NIL.
You whole argument is nothing more than a bigoted piece of nonsense which is not supported by academic facts – and you religion is just the same.
As I’m an atheist, perhaps you’d care to tell me why I haven’t killed someone? Why I haven’t raped someone? Why I haven’t abused a child? Why I haven’t had an STD? Why I haven’t committed any crimes? Why I haven’t had a violent fight?
What’s stopping me exactly?
It’s a little something called INNATE MORALITY. I know what will harm someone, and what will not. I have the ability to empathise with my fellow human being, whereas you clearly can’t.
I know, for example, that child rape harms a child and society in so many ways. I also know, that Catholic priests are renowned for it.
But I also know, that a loving gay couple, harm no-one. But the same Catholic priest, who willingly sucks a child’s privates, tells you that their loving and consensual adult relationship is evil.
I know where I get my morality from, and I know where you get your morality from.
The thing is, I’m not a weak mind who needs to be told what is right and wrong. I can see and think about what’s right and wrong – and why. But you can’t do that. You’ve no empathy, you’ve no intelligence and you are just a bigoted idiot with no clue about the world.
Religion stops a thinking mind dead – just as it has with yours.

      1. 2:07 pm
        Many respondents bring up the Catholic Church in their posts. I’m an Orthodox rabbi, I don’t know that much about the Catholic Church.
        I have never done a comprehensive study of Swedish culture so it is hard for me to respond to what you wrote. Assuming for the moment that what you wrote is true; I would have to see how long Sweden has been so predominantly atheistic, they certainly had a Judeo-Christian tradition for many years. My guess is that many of their core values are still based on that. In truth though I am speculating. I would have to look into it more.
        Be that as it may, ultimately ideas are what animate people. If you believe that a human being is the result of a directionless, meaningless, and purposeless process, eventually it will start to affect very deeply how you look at people and how you treat them. You have clearly inherited many of the core values of a Judeo-Christian tradition. The most fundamental of all is that a human being has inherent and intrinsic value and preciousness. This concept is based on Biblical statement that man is created in the image of God.
        In a sense you believe that, you have just eliminated God from the picture. You do not view people as glorified cockroaches, which is in reality what we are.
        Sigmund Freud stated: The moment a man contemplates the meaning and VALUE OF LIFE, he is sick, since objectively neither has any existence.
        My understanding is that you try to treat people as if they have real value, totally contradicting an objective view of a godless world. I hope you continue that way. However, that is a legacy that is almost impossible to pass on to a new generation that has never been exposed to a religious cultural tradition.
        Sadly, there is no such thing as INNATE MORALITY. Our so called innate moral sense gives radically different messages to different people in different societies in different time periods. This “innate moral sense” is notoriously fickle. One man’s deep moral feeling is another man’s indigestion.

        1. 4:26 pm
          I love how you wave away the evidence he put to you by saying “Be that as it may” and then ramble with speculative statements that have no evidence backing them up whatsoever. “eventually it will start to affect very deeply how you look at people and how you treat them.” where is your evidence/proof for that statement rabbi? Robert brought legitimate numbers and you wave them off as to suggest they don’t mean anything. THEY DO MEAN SOMETHING. and once again I tell you to stop quoting that irrelevant statement to simply invoke Freud’s name. It has nothing to do with what he’s talking about and in fact does nothing for your argument. I do hope people can identify and see past these fallacies because under them your argument is nill as I have explained above with the issue of empathy.
Comment 3
Morality is determined by culture. That’s it. Religion is part of some cultures, not so much in others. It’s just one piece of a very complex puzzle that’s never static. That is just the way it is. Deal with it. For those who want to claim that there is some ultimate moral code handed down from just one of the ancient Hebrew deities, the god in question first needs to show up. Being invisible and only communicating through hallucinations and ghost writers is not anywhere near a valid claim to even consider worthwhile. We have to live with the fact that we are the ones who set our own rules. We create the cultures under which we exist. Any faults found are with us, as are the benefits. There is no group of atheists that advocate or even consider pedophilia as a viable cultural option. This author is just plain nuts. He tries to produce an example of psychiatric professionals discussing topics they should be discussing as a point of moral decline somehow. Not discussing things is what gets us in trouble, just like abstinence-only “education” for kids actually increases unwanted pregnancies. Information is good–all kinds of information. Myths and superstitions don’t qualify.

  1. 2:11 pm
    I agree with you. In an atheistic world we “set our own rules.” None are more valid or invalid than any others.
    That is why at least Singer and Marks (and virtually every other major atheistic thinker) are honest enough to state that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with molesting children.

    1. 5:15 pm
      Rabbi again you underhandedly try to imply that atheistic thinkers see nothing wrong with molesting children. They do I assure you. They state, once again I’ll explain since you can’t understand, that NOTHING is intrinsically wrong. You like to only state molestation but they believe that NOTHING is intrinsically wrong OR intrinsically right (Including molestation) because there is no innate intrinsic moral basis. That does not mean there is not a moral basis that we come up with through empathy, learning and science. It amazes me that you can still spout such garbage after this has been explained to you. Stop twisting statements to suit your unfounded argument. REPLY
I think it was important to take you through my debate process. I hope you can see how through learning from his and others statements helped refine my own argument and helped me see what exactly was wrong with his, most notably his logical fallacies. I found it quite exhausting and very infuriating (this being my first argument/debate with anyone over religion) but in the end I felt much more confident and sure about where I stand and exactly why I stand there. My argument was refined with the help of fellow Atheists and I can now say with all the confidence in the world that my current argument against the rabbi has bested his own. It is important also that we help to point out the mistakes to others to stop him from “seeming” correct and intelligent. I take the rabbi’s silence as a bitter sweet win for atheism being that he simply stopped responding to me instead of admitting his mistakes or that he was wrong. 
I am an Atheist. Don’t stop!


  1. Good attempt at getting Moshe to directly answer any questions.
    Typically, he does not, instead, as you discovered, he simply replies in rhetoric
    and self promotion, which is really what his posts are all about.

    My assessment of his MO is to simply sensationalize a topic, over and over again
    AND throw the term "Atheist" in the title to try and "get our goat".

    Don't fall for the ploy, he of course, like most theist, are attempting to hold onto the
    what they can to sway believers from looking outside their faith for "real" answers.
    Or, to live a better, truer, happier life. 8-)

    Many jewish descendants, numerous friends of mine included, make up this growing segment
    of society called non-theistic views "atheism" what ever, it's the rejection of ALL

    Keep up the good work, make him stay on his toes, but know he relishes in his
    attitude and loves to see us atheists jump all over his inaccurate portrayal of people he
    probably knows little about.

    Take care (Shane Cooper AKA CoScooper - a few posts on his articles here and there.)

  2. Yes sir I remember your posts. I realized that once my argument was finalized and he wasn't responding I had to stop, I was just constantly checking the posts for three days solid and trying to get him to answer. He did finally answer a few of these and a few more I had posted but they were made up entirely of fallacies, as soon as I ripped everyone of those down, as I felt was my obligation, I had to (and still am trying to) force myself to not go back. He's quite infuriating and people, including myself, need to know when they just aren't going to get it. Thank you for following me over here Shane and you take care as well.


  3. Rabbi Averik doesn't seem to think much of empathy, stating the following:

    "To avoid confronting the fact that in an atheistic world the worldview of Ghengis Kan and Abraham Maslow are equally significant and valid, they invoke mystical concepts like “empathy” as if their own particular emotional make-up should determine the values of all humanity."

    Funny for a Rabbi to speak ill of "mystical concepts", but it's hardly a surprise in his case. I believe to him empathy for others is merely a way to make himself feel superior, a very sociopathic attitude.

  4. The Rabbi is again using logical fallacies to trick his readers into discrediting empathy as mystical when I clearly told him multiple times that empathy is a proven observable chemical process in the brain. he completely lies about what empathy is. His statement about Kan and Maslow is completely irrelevant in terms of empathy to his original argument that in an atheistic society we could condone molestation and bestiality. He attacks people who don't answer directly to him but he has no problem dodging and creating red herring arguments to try and not answer. empathy is a scientifically proven process NOT some fake made up mystical phenomenon (funny because that's exactly the term he would then be forced to use for his god...hm) again I say, for the maybe 17th or 18th time, try again Rabbi.

    Thank you very much for the comment Kalseigh. If I haven't responded to one of the rabbi's comments to one of mine it is only because I have chosen to stop going to the article and indulging him in his constant unending fallacies. If you or anyone for that matter sees anything else you think he answered convincingly or well that you'd like an answer to just post it and I'd be happy to explain why the rabbi's comment is incorrect (I say this because I'm almost positive that nothing the rabbi says is correct or anything but a fallacy to his unfortunate readers) Thank you again and don't hesitate to post more!

    Don't Stop!