The Dark Results of Moral Relativism

If you’re looking for an example of what happens when members of society believe that HUMANS determine what is right and wrong, I have screenshots of the incident this week. (An event which forced me to write an apology letter to my dad’s readers on his blog.)

I’ll get to that in a second.

First, I need you to be familiar with the visual I shared two days ago, to help explain the “Moral Dilemma” of Atheists. You can read the full post here–and appreciate the nice, big picture I included as an aid. 🙂

But, the 2-cent version is that we’re all astronauts, hovering in the blackness of outer space, with NO WAY of determining which way is “up” without something bigger than ourselves to use as a reference point.

We’re floating and arguing “THIS WAY IS UP! I’M RIGHT! YOU’RE WRONG!” But words like up/down and right/wrong are ultimately meaningless. There’s no such thing as “direction” in outerspace.

Theists believe that the Universe has a Creator, who exists outside of space and time, and who serves as a reference point for what’s “good” or “bad,” which astronauts like us can tie our tether to.

But Secular Humanists believe that we can clump a whole bunch of astronauts together and eventually make a pile big enough to play God’s role. Whatever a large group of astronauts agrees to call “up” will just BE “up.” And we’ll all cross our fingers and hope we don’t encounter ANOTHER clumped-up group of astronauts who think that “up” goes a different direction….

….because then things are going to get ugly.

That’s essentially the conflict that happened this week, when a couple of Christians who are tethered to their Creator bumped into a clump of floating humans who are of the opinion that homosexuality is “good” but pedophilia is “bad.”

They were asked to give the reasoning behind their belief. But, of course, they weren’t able to justify it. Because they just made it up and agreed as a group to follow those rules arbitrarily…

And that’s when it quickly became obvious that this clump of floating humans holds other interesting moral opinions as well. Namely, on Planet Floating Atheist, if someone hurts your feelings, you are allowed to punish them however you see fit.

If you utter any words they subjectively decide to call “hate speech,” then they will feel justified in stalking you, mocking your family, and even publishing your private information, such as an IP Address.

That’s illegal in every country on planet earth. But, on Planet Floating Atheist, the end justifies the means. You started it. You deserve it. Those are the rules some Secular Humanists have made up for themselves.

This week, an anonymous Atheist (who attacks people under the name “Pink Agendist”) stalked a friend of mine named Jeff and published a picture of his wife and daughters in effort to shame and break him. (I’ll link again to my apology on my dad’s blog here, if you’d like more details, and a few more screenshots: )

But what I want you to understand, in the scope of this post, is WHY someone like Pink would be so backward in this thinking? WHY would he call his actions “good?”

In fact, I want you to read these screenshots, where he spells it out:

4.4.19 Pink is the Real Victim (1) (edit)

Did you catch it? Pink maintains that nothing seriously bad happened to Jeff, because the REAL victims are those who are “compared” with something negative.

If you make that comparison, you deserve to be stalked and doxxed. That’s how it works in their little clump…they’re pointing “up” and YOU’RE pointing down!

Look, here he explains it even clearer:

4.4.19 Pink is the Real Victim (2) (edit)

So, not only do people who make comparisons deserve to be shamed–but anyone who “gives them cover” will ALSO be forced to join the clump/mob…or face the consequences.

It’s a tough place to live, on Planet Floating Atheist!

But don’t take my word for it. Last year, this opinion piece was written by a man who used to be a crazed Social Activist Mobster, like the Pink Agendist.

He says the constant need to be seen as a “good” person (as well as the fear of being attacked by the very mob you’ve joined), causes a person to go along with horrible abuses without even stopping to ask if they’re still facing “Up.”

He writes:

“In my previous life, I was a self-righteous social justice crusader. I would use my mid-sized Twitter and Facebook platforms to signal my wokeness on topics such as LGBT rights, rape culture, and racial injustice. Many of the opinions I held then are still opinions that I hold today. But I now realize that my social-media hyperactivity was, in reality, doing more harm than good.

Within the world created by the various apps I used, I got plenty of shares and retweets. But this masked how ineffective I had become outside, in the real world. The only causes I was actually contributing to were the causes of mobbing and public shaming. Real change does not stem from these tactics. They only cause division, alienation, and bitterness…”

Sound familiar?

The writer correctly identifies his problem in the first sentence as “self-righteousness.” This mindless attacking and shaming is EXACTLY what happens, when humans with a survive-or-die mentality are told they must create meaning and direction for themselves.

They’re going to float in a very selfish, violent, mob-like direction…

The author goes on to say:

“I mobbed and shamed people for incidents that became front page news. But when they were vindicated or exonerated by some real-world investigation, it was treated as a footnote by my online community. If someone survives a social justice callout, it simply means that the mob has moved on to someone new. No one ever apologizes for a false accusation, and everyone has a selective memory regarding what they’ve done…”

I’m positive the thing described here–the place where self-righteous people devour each other but are never full–is just another way of saying “Hell.”

Everyone does whatever feels good, ushered along by the equally animal-like behavior of the temporary allies clumped around them. No purpose except survival.

I sincerely hope the Radical Atheists are able to escape from Hell (and perhaps tether themselves to their Creator?) before it’s too late and the Mob of Planet Floating Atheist finally turns to eats them.

Moral Relativism is a dark, meaningless, and eventually violent place.

11 thoughts on “The Dark Results of Moral Relativism

  1. mrsmcmommy Post author

    As an addendum, my friend Jeff responded to this mindless attack the way someone indwelt by the Holy Spirit would: he told the Pink Agendist he wishes him no ill will and will pray for him.

    Only someone tethered to their Creator can overcome the urge to lash out at that guy, and offer him peace instead. Jeff made a GOOD decision, and I’m proud of him for showing the citizens of Planet Floating Atheist the way UP. 🙂


  2. Jasmine Ruigrok

    I’m not gonna lie, sometimes the way they y’all spin me around so bad I’m not even sure what point they’re making and I don’t know what I’m arguing against. You and your Dad do a brilliant job of cutting the crap and pointing out the heart of an argument. I appreciate you both bringing clarity to such murky depths. You put a spotlight on the nothing that is truly there in their “philosophies”.

    Liked by 1 person


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s