WHAT WE DO IS NONE OF GOD'S BUSINESS
 
What should atheists focus on more than the question if there is a God?
On proving that even if there is we should not give him any consideration.
 
What do religionists mean when they say that since there is a moral law, that implies that there is a God to make that law?

They are really denying the commonsense observation that the suffering of a baby is evil regardless of whether the suffering is necessary for a justifiable purpose or not. Since evil exists and is undesirable it follows that we should get rid of it. They are saying you can't regard it as evil unless you believe in God. They are evil for teaching this bigoted nonsense.  Looking for God to validate it means they must need something to tell them it is wrong.  What does that say about them?
 
What else is evil about their doctrine?
Its fundamentalism. We all know that we sometimes have to do harm for a greater good and when that harm is essential for bringing that good about.
 
Is belief in God important then if it has nothing to do with morality or righteousness which means causing the least possible pain and suffering?
No. They are bigots for making a big deal out of the belief.
 
Is wrongdoing wrong because it is wrong or is it wrong because God forbids it?
If it is wrong whether there is a God or not then belief in God is not important and what matters is being productive to society. If it is wrong just because God forbids it then it follows child-rape would be right if God commanded it. Religion responds that God wouldn't command that for his nature is kindness. It says then that his will is not arbitrary. But this is still saying that things are right not because they are right but because God commands them.
 
Do we need God to believe in right and wrong?
No. To do good just to obey God means we are doing it to obey and not because it is good. No matter how much good we do our intentions are not good. We are degraded and we degrade those who we use to please God. We need to ignore God and/or disbelieve to mean to do real good.
 
What about the view that God does not have the intention to tell us what to do all the time for he has made us to be free rational creatures?
But God is supposed to always know what is best. If we make up our own minds and are wrong that means we unwittingly oppose him and what is right. The view contradicts the teaching that the more good we are the more free we are. If we really want to be free, we will listen to him all the time. If he does not tell us then he is not very supportive of our freedom!
 
Is its God's business what we do to another person?
No. Religion believes that it is what we intend by our actions not the actions themselves that counts. God enables the actions to happen and have the results they have for he is almighty. This means our responsibility is our intentions.
 
Is it true that to hurt another person or ourselves is to hurt God for he has lavished his loving care on us all?
God then has to be annoyed that his work on his child is mocked and not that the child is hurt.
 
Is it true that God does not like us hurting his child so we have to apologise to God for it?
No. You can't say sorry to God for hurting the child but maybe you can say sorry for upsetting God.
 
Should you say sorry to God for disgusting him by your sins?
The sins don't hurt him. He chooses to be upset so its his problem and he is not entitled to an apology. The God of the Christians is an interfering old prig by asking for us to come to him to say sorry for hurting people. Also, its an insult to the hurt person to say God comes first for that implies it is more important to be sorry for offending God than for hurting the person.
 
How does the thought that we need belief in God to be able to believe in things being objectively wrong fit all this?
To hurt a baby is to hurt the mother for she has loved the baby and done so much for him and loves him now. It is not objectively wrong. It is subjectively wronging her but not objectively wronging. So it would seem to be with God. God does not help the cause of those who want to use the concept to teach objective wrong.
 
Why say that it only seems that hurting God's child is hurting God just like cruelly hurting a baby would be hurting its mother?
Its not the same. God has no needs. The mother needs her child to be safe.
 
Is it true that we must apologise to God for hurting others for his law is that we must not hurt them?
You don't apologise to the judge for speeding. Its the law you have to make amends to. Law is not people.
 
Is it true that God alone can give our lives and deeds meaning and purpose?
Believers say yes for if we had eternal life on earth we would get bored. This is nonsense. It is like saying that the longer you live the more bored you get. It is one of their psychological manipulations to create a need for belief in God. Its a vicious insult to those who love life and who have the maturity to accept its challenges.
 
What about the view that if there is no God to answer to for our actions that we have no deterrent for doing evil?
It is not answering to people or any person that is the main deterrent but the punishment.
 
What about the view that atheists say suffering disproves God which does not lessen anybody's suffering but rather takes away hope?
We should be hoping that we will cope and that if we can't we will get relief perhaps in death. You don't need God for either of these.
 
Are the atheists doing sufferers a favour by saying there is no God to help?
You will wonder why God lets you suffer. This is painful. You will not suffer that pain if you deny the existence of God. If you are in the throes of agony, crying to God will only worsen your pain for it will not be relieved.
 
Is there any justification for believing its God's business what we do?
None - no wonder religion never tries to give any and nobody has a clue why they should worry about God.
 
I know I exist and I know it 100% and any other knowledge is really just belief and not full knowledge and so what does this tell me about God?
That he has no right to lay down orders for me. I must make my own choices and rules.
 
If there is no law unless God makes it, what does that tell you about God?
That his commands are about authority, not about being right - even if they are right. Their rightness is merely incidental. God is therefore evil and unworthy of being served.
 
Do we obey others and do we respect authority?
We do not. Another says we must do something. We decide that we must do it therefore we do it because we decide to and not because of the authority. We may seem to obey and authority. We do not.
 
Has God made evil?
Yes - evil is a power. Unhappiness is a power. It is a real feeling - its not just the absence of happiness.
 
Why does religion say that God did not make evil for its not a power but is merely a lack - that is, it is something that is not as good as it can be?
They insult human suffering for the sake of saying God has nothing to do with evil. To say that evil is not a power but merely the absence of happiness is just callous and undeniably deceptive.
 
Are religious people humanists without admitting it?
Yes. They believe that even God can't make wrong right or vice versa. Many lie that they don't. Good is good whether there is a god or not.