Would Atheists support welfare? Why?

Started by mediumaevum, March 02, 2014, 02:18:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

mediumaevum

EDIT:
--------------
Given the amount of misunderstanding of this thread, I can tell you that I am NOT a Social Darwinist. This post is showing my concern about accepting Darwin's ideas as
being used in a political context (Social Darwinism) to "improve" society. I am not a proponent of this idea, quite the contrary.

--------------

Give me some reasons why Atheists should support welfare, given Darwinian evolution says that those unfit to live, should die off.

It's one of THE main reasons I am still clinging to my beliefs: Darwinian Evolution would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger.

According to Evolution, there really is no need for people in permanent need of welfare. In-fact, Evolution tells us that people in need of permanent welfare, who will
always, permanently be more costly than beneficial for society as a whole, should die off.

There is a logic in providing temporary welfare for those temporarily
ill or temporarily disabled, in order to make them healthy individuals capable of getting re-included in the workforce, but those who are permanently without ability to work in order to sustain themselves, is not just unworthy, they are a harm to society, according to Darwinian Evolution.

I would like to know an Atheist response to this, in favor of Welfare for the permanently needy, based
on Atheism.

The only one I can think of is the Survival of the Fittest argument:
If the "Fittest" becomes "unfit", before he is getting unfit, he would like to have assurance that he could get help, if he should be permanently unfit, sometime in the future.

But this could easily be solved with the Fittest paying for an Insurance himself. This would not include those who are unfit from birth.

Moriarty

Quote from: "mediumaevum"Give me some reasons why Atheists should support welfare, given Darwinian evolution says that those unfit to live, should die off.

It's one of THE main reasons I am still clinging to my beliefs: Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger.

According to Evolution, there really is no need for people in permanent need of welfare. In-fact, Evolution tells us that people in need of permanent welfare, who will
always, permanently be more costly than beneficial for society as a whole, should die off.

There is a logic in providing temporary welfare for those temporarily
ill or temporarily disabled, in order to make them healthy individuals capable of getting re-included in the workforce, but those who are permanently without ability to work in order to sustain themselves, is not just unworthy, they are a harm to society, according to Darwinian Evolution.

I would like to know an Atheist response to this, in favor of Welfare for the permanently needy, based
on Atheism.


One could make a case that those who can get people to support their life styles without having to lift a finger on their own are the ones naturally selected. That goes for both the poor and the rich execs that really don't contribute a fucking thing.

Meaning you're making the assumption that natural selection will always seek out the strongest or most intelligent. When that is faulty at best with humans.
<Insert witty remark>

"Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he wouldn\'t have stood for Russian aggression in the Ukraine. He\'d have invaded New Zealand by now."--Donald O\'Keeffe.

mediumaevum

#2
Quote from: "Moriarty"
Quote from: "mediumaevum"Give me some reasons why Atheists should support welfare, given Darwinian evolution says that those unfit to live, should die off.

It's one of THE main reasons I am still clinging to my beliefs: Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger.

According to Evolution, there really is no need for people in permanent need of welfare. In-fact, Evolution tells us that people in need of permanent welfare, who will
always, permanently be more costly than beneficial for society as a whole, should die off.

There is a logic in providing temporary welfare for those temporarily
ill or temporarily disabled, in order to make them healthy individuals capable of getting re-included in the workforce, but those who are permanently without ability to work in order to sustain themselves, is not just unworthy, they are a harm to society, according to Darwinian Evolution.

I would like to know an Atheist response to this, in favor of Welfare for the permanently needy, based
on Atheism.


One could make a case that those who can get people to support their life styles without having to lift a finer on their own are the ones naturally selected. That goes for both the poor and the rich execs that really don't contribute a fucking thing.

Meaning you're making the assumption that natural selection will always seek out the strongest or most intelligent. When that is faulty at best with humans.

But the strongest could, with ease and with little to no effort, abolish the welfare state. They don't, as long as they (or society, or population as a whole) is still holding on to
religious "mumbo-jumbo" with claims that Ethics should play a role. The is nothing in Nature that says that Ethics needs to play a role in society, quite the contrary,
society would be better off without ethics, and only holding on to who has the sword, has the might, he who has the might, has the right, without supporting those who permanently cannot support themselves, according to Darwinian Evolution.

As for the super-rich, they are naturally selected, to be fit. No matter what happens, they have nature with them, in the way that if Welfare is abolished, the Super-Rich would just use their own money to support themselves. And if they were to be taxed, they could just move away, to another country.

Hijiri Byakuren

Depends on how intelligently you set it up.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

mediumaevum

#4
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Depends on how intelligently you set it up.

I'd like you to provide an example.

No matter how intelligently you setup any type of logical reasoning with predefined variables, you are always going to
follow the course of that logic.

Say for instance A = 1 and B = 2, and we have an equation with two variables added together, then A+B would naturally be 3. There is no way you could change that fact.

PopeyesPappy

Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.
Save a life. Adopt a Greyhound.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: "mediumaevum"
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Depends on how intelligently you set it up.

I'd like you to provide an example.
Not happening on this phone.
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Moriarty

Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Depends on how intelligently you set it up.

Pretty much...


Every human being has something to offer, even if it's playing part of the class system at the bottom.

If you tell me that children starving and dying in Africa are being "naturally selected" out, I would firmly disagree.
<Insert witty remark>

"Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he wouldn\'t have stood for Russian aggression in the Ukraine. He\'d have invaded New Zealand by now."--Donald O\'Keeffe.

mediumaevum

Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.

Sorry, I didn't mean Atheism, I meant Darwinian Evolution. I have edited this in my Original Topic.

I do have compassion for my fellow humans, regardless of the existence or non-existence of God(s).

But Darwinian Evolution tells us that compassion is worthless, not to speak of harmful, unless it is about making the individual we have compassion for, capable of being useful to us.

Moriarty

Quote from: "mediumaevum"
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.

Sorry, I didn't mean Atheism, I meant Darwinian Evolution. I have edited this in my Original Topic.

I do have compassion for my fellow humans, regardless of the existence or non-existence of God(s).

But Darwinian Evolution tells us that compassion is worthless, not to speak of harmful, unless it is about making the individual we have compassion for, capable of being useful to us.

Well then shouldn't you post your question to an evolutionist's board? Seems like you're targeting the wrong group here. Some Atheists are hard core conservatives and do not support welfare.
<Insert witty remark>

"Say what you will about George W. Bush, but he wouldn\'t have stood for Russian aggression in the Ukraine. He\'d have invaded New Zealand by now."--Donald O\'Keeffe.

mediumaevum

Quote from: "Moriarty"
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"Depends on how intelligently you set it up.

Pretty much...


Every human being has something to offer, even if it's playing part of the class system at the bottom.

If you tell me that children starving and dying in Africa are being "naturally selected" out, I would firmly disagree.

You are using the Ethical argument that says that everyone can contribute to society, in one way or the other.

I would like to agree with this, but I can't.

According to logical reasoning, if one cost more to society than one is able to give back, one is worhless.

I  hate that reasoning, and I would like to have it proven untrue, but that's the reason for this thread.

PopeyesPappy

Quote from: "mediumaevum"
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.

Sorry, I didn't mean Atheism, I meant Darwinian Evolution. I have edited this in my Original Topic.

I do have compassion for my fellow humans, regardless of the existence or non-existence of God(s).

But Darwinian Evolution tells us that compassion is worthless, not to speak of harmful, unless it is about making the individual we have compassion for, capable of being useful to us.

So what is it about Darwinian evolution that you think rules out human compassion?
Save a life. Adopt a Greyhound.

mediumaevum

#12
Quote from: "Moriarty"
Quote from: "mediumaevum"
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.

Sorry, I didn't mean Atheism, I meant Darwinian Evolution. I have edited this in my Original Topic.

I do have compassion for my fellow humans, regardless of the existence or non-existence of God(s).

But Darwinian Evolution tells us that compassion is worthless, not to speak of harmful, unless it is about making the individual we have compassion for, capable of being useful to us.

Well then shouldn't you post your question to an evolutionist's board? Seems like you're targeting the wrong group here. Some Atheists are hard core conservatives and do not support welfare.

Evolutionism is a natural consequence of Atheism.
All Atheists should be evolutionists, according to Atheism, saying there is no God, only Evolution.

Gawdzilla Sama

Quote from: "mediumaevum"Evolutionism is a natural consequence of Atheism.
All Atheists should be evolutionists, according to Atheism, saying there is no God but Evolution.
So people who say there is no god declared Evolution to be a god? Damn, you must have been the runt of your litter.
We 'new atheists' have a reputation for being militant, but make no mistake  we didn't start this war. If you want to place blame put it on the the religious zealots who have been poisoning the minds of the  young for a long long time."
PZ Myers

mediumaevum

Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"
Quote from: "mediumaevum"
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"Your argument is a bullshit strawman. Atheists do not believe "Atheism would mean the weak should die off, either by forced suicide, execution (forced euthanasia) or by hunger." Atheists do not believe in god. Period. End of shared atheistic beliefs.

I won't speak for others here, but I believe in welfare because I have compassion for my fellow humans. If you personally are lacking compassion for your fellow humans then please continue to cling to your theistic beliefs because fear of your eternal fate is apparently the only reason you have for not treating others like shit.

Sorry, I didn't mean Atheism, I meant Darwinian Evolution. I have edited this in my Original Topic.

I do have compassion for my fellow humans, regardless of the existence or non-existence of God(s).

But Darwinian Evolution tells us that compassion is worthless, not to speak of harmful, unless it is about making the individual we have compassion for, capable of being useful to us.

So what is it about Darwinian evolution that you think rules out human compassion?

When people realize that compassion is harmful to society, they would naturally throw their compassion away.

Example:

The ageing population of European (mainly Scandinavian) Welfare States means there are fewer and fewer people to pay for their welfare (Old Age Pensions, Nusery Homes etc.).

Sometime in the future, these Welfare States would HAVE TO force the old people to undergo Euthanasia, to put a limit to how old people can get, in order to avoid bankruptcy and other crises.

It's not a matter of wether we want it or not. China would also need to kill off a certain percentage of its population, so would India, and many other countries. I believe the UN would, sometime in the future, agree that killing off the weakest and even the poorest is "neccessary evil" to avoid over-population of Earth.

Don't misunderstand me: I hate that idea, but according to logical reasoning, there is no other way out of this problem.
No of what I know of.

I don't want this to happen. I just fear it will happen, because humanity has proven itself horribly good at survival, and is prepared to do ANYTHING to preserve its own specie.

Either we have to throw away compassion, to preserve the Human specie, or, if we choose compassion, humanity should be faced with certain extinction.

I prefer the latter.