You said, ONCE AGAIN:
"None of us would want to live in a society without some sort of an ethical sensitivity based on solid religious faith."
Your only defense of that statement has been to claim, as you have here, that you wouldn't want to live in a culture where that viewpoint is actively silenced. But that is NOT what you said.
Now, some follow-up questions have been posed to you dozens of times but you have steadfastly refused to answer. I'd like to challenge you here, once and for all, to give an answer:
What if a society had no "ethical sensitivity based on solid religious faith," simply through the progress of its history and development? We're not talking about active persecution of religion, just a society that evolved to not have it anymore. Why would you not want to live in such a society? What would be so wrong with it?
Will you answer here, or once again disappear and force us to conclude that you just don't think atheists can be moral without religion?
Oh, and if you're up for it, please explain this other DIRECT quote from you that I asked for clarification on and never received. Thanks!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=50604
= new reply since forum marked as read