Without God, there is no real respect for human life.

My title is supposed to inspire criticism of me as “God's trouble,” so I will preface the preface as you see today, stating that it was not mystical of a floating desert, with a constantly halo decorated. I was not raised with faith. At age 12, I was an agnostic, “I would never believe or believe there was no evidence.” Later I would rather deny theists. In reality, we see them as God is bothering us, but we didn't have that terminology or secular warriors like Richard Dawkins. I think we, relatively speaking, were obstacles to our very cynical antitheism exercises.

But that changed – and I changed. I was able to move on to a highly discernible admiration long ago. However, my faith dictates that pride is the father of all sin, and warns that humility is a virtue, and that “those who exalt themselves will be humble.” The perception that I will explain today further explains why I have changed. I'll mention my spiritual evolution, not because I'm narcissistic (that's not that I'm not!), but perhaps a few non-believers will consider knowing more seriously that it doesn't come from someone.

Have you ever wondered what, in principle, brings true respect for human life? (And no, this article is not “on abortion,” but what's included here certainly applies.) Well, we often tend to emphasize that people are more important than things, especially to those who are greedy among us. Material things are convenient, and sometimes beautiful toys, but they are just things and say, “You can't take them with you.” But without God, what are people, and therefore there is no spiritual world, are we just an accident in the universe?

After that, we are just a few pounds of chemicals and water, or organic robots.

In fact, we are things.

And people are less important than when it's things.

That we are merely under an atheistic worldview is an indisputable result that has been recognized by the atheists themselves. We remember a fellow online who probably said we humans are “really cool robots” robots. A botanist named Lawrence Trebanion, who looks more clinical on this issue, defines people as “perceptive objects” (thankfully he is responsible for the health of plants, not people, but the meaning of this belief is serious.

As our founders argued, it often emphasizes in America that “our rights come from God.” The logic is airtight. People ultimately succumb to greater power, authority, wisdom, and completely postpone them to ultimate power (if they recognize it). The belief that how persuasive it is, that the creator of the universe and all the false authors have ordered something. And this, by the way, is not a matter of faith, but rather a fact: human psychology. Generally speaking, it makes people like it or not.

Is that different from human life? In principle, when people consider humans' creation to be in God, they respect it, breathe in soul and are considered sacred by God. But if he's just an organic robot, all bets are off.

After all, changing the robot's software or hardware can be wrong. So what's wrong with social engineering or genetic engineering, respectively? What is the problem with ending the function of a robot that has become inconvenient or defective operation that has surpassed treatment?

In fact, throwing away what has become a responsibility isn't just what we do. That's wise and right.

I don't think it's a coincidence that eugenics (the science of improving humanity through selective breeding (primitive genetic engineering)) has become prominent in the rise in evolution, which is most associated with Charles Darwin. I also think it's no coincidence that the term “eugenics” was coined by Sir Francis Gerton, half of Charles Darwin's cousin. Eugenics is the first cousin of evolution.

Indeed, as explained in 2008, the concept of evolution as some explanation of the mechanisms of intelligent design is compatible with theism. However, the general concept of evolution is divine-free and can help replace intelligent design. This is because if a human is a sacredly created finished product, it falls, but has no reason or right to change the intended design. We may only address defects caused by falling conditions. But if a person is just an accident in the universe, is it the result of a chemical that somehow “lives” in primitive soups, and somehow has the desire to stay alive and become more complicated? He has since been merely an ongoing job and we are the only intelligent designers who can promote his improvement. If God did not raise him out of the mud, we might reshape him rightly like wet clay.

Now, what's most interesting here is that anyone familiar with psychology may notice this atheistic human opinion. It's exactly how psychopaths see others. As the website's psychopaths and love states, “Psychopaths actually see the people around them as objects.” What's more, those who think it's important by May will just as admit it to honest moments (if they have honest moments). What comes to mind is that cannibalistic serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer said that evolutionary beliefs influence the descent into the darkness. As he said in a prison interview after essentially Christian conversation, he believed that “we were all just from slime”? (In a related note, he told his parents like he was a teenager, “If there's no God, why can't I make up my rules?”)

But here's something even more impressive. If atheism is “true,” this mental illness worldview is correct. It is a real perception without the sentimental eruption of hearing loss.

Reassure my non-follow friends and remember that I was once one of you, yes, I know that the majority of you are not psychopaths. But, as I explained, this is because you really don't live your atheism and all of its meanings. And as long as some of you are thinking about the problem and concluded that we are just “really cool robots”, you (thankfully) don't feel this on an emotional level. You will not live in your beliefs.

So, what about the title of my article? After all, some people don't recognize God, but in reality they respect human life. The answer adds a twist to what George Washington says about morality. Witness: “With attention to us, we indulge in the assumption that the moral respect of our people can be maintained without religion.” (Of course, respect for life is part of morality.) As the commercial says, “Individual outcomes can vary.” However, the picture of the nation (group) is clear. The more we make mainstream gods the more it and its consequences permeate not only the mind but also the mind, but also the more people. This is because of the very calm atheist who thoughts I read decades ago expressed concern over the broader embrace of his beliefs. He understood what it means.

He also, like most people, cared about civilization and knew that faith was a prerequisite for its endurance. The reason for this persuasive belief is why the late Pope Benedict XVI wrote in the crisis of culture that Christianity and secularists were wise to “live as if God existed.”

Certainly, human psychology is not a matter of faith, it is a fact. Give people a good rationale for being a mentally ill long enough, and a more mentally ill civilization may be your destiny.

Contact Selwyn Duke and follow him on X (formerly Twitter), Mewe, GetTr, Tumblr, Instagram, or Substack, or log on to selwynduke.com.