₦airaland Forum

Wike just confessed how the last election was rigged.

jaephoenix:
So birds perching on rooftops at night is spiritual attack?
Whoever thought education would help Africa is wrong. We are just hopeless

Africa is not hopeless. You're just seeing it through a colonial lens. There are Europeans and Americans who believe in witchcraft, in fiat earth and alien abductions. Does that make all of them hopeless. No. So why apply a different standard to Africa?

LordReed:
3 Gbosa for you plus 1 bottle of your favourite drink.

You hit the nail squarely. I dunno how anyone can prevaricate after this simple point.

Thank you. The point is simple, but simple points don't land when one's opponent is defending a belief rather than following the argument.

SIRTee15:
Guy u already admit that your moral fibre comes from religious belief. Thus, nothing more to discuss with u.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never admitted anywhere that my morality comes religious beliefs. I said it comes from multiple sources, one of which is religion. "From religion" or "religious based " is not the same as from "religious beliefs". The mathematics the Islamic world gave us comes from that religion, but you benefit from it without believing in Allah.

Pls go back and read my initial post. I'm not here to prove evidence of God nor to show u the biblical morality is the best.

All I'm here to show is that atheism on its own has no objective morality to stand on except if they borrow from religious belief.

If you're saying you're not here to prove God exists or that biblical morality is best, then your claim reduces to this: atheists and agnostics borrow from religion. But borrowing from religion doesn't mean the codes came from God, or we borrowed it because we believe it came from God or gods. Religion is man -made. So you've conceded the whole point while thinking you've won it.

U guys know the truth, a society or family needs a structured objective morality to function and progress. And as far as I can see that comes from religious belief whose source comes from a higher power or alternative reality.

Otherwise morality becomes relative which is what has become of western world when they embrace liberal secularism as the source of their morality which eventually leads to moral decadence.

1. You're just asserting something, not arguing for it. "From religion" is not the same as "from religious beliefs". Stop confusing the two.

2.Morality didn't become relative because of failure to recognise a higher power or did because of liberal secularism..

It became situated, meaning the principles stay the same, but applying them requires judgement about circumstances. Your own Bible shows this. "Thou shalt not lie" is absolute, until Abraham lies to save his life. God doesn't rebuke him and doesn't revoke the covenant. The Egyptian midwives lied to Pharaoh to save the Hebrew babies. God blessed them with babies of their own.

So either the rule changes or God is inconsistent. Whichever you choose, morality required human judgement, not a mechanical rule or blind obedience.

3. If liberal secularism causes moral decadence then the most secular countries in the world, Sweden, Norway an Japan would be less safe, less healthy , and less stable than the most religious ones, but they aren't. What you call moral decadence is often moral change you dislike. Naming something "decadence" doesn't prove it is.

U are the one arguing about evidence of God and I deliberately ignored u because I'm not here to play that game.

If u want evidence for God, open a new topic and we will discuss it. Thanks.

I haven't asked you for evidence of God, and I'm not arguing about the evidence of God. I asked, and I'm still asking, what evidence you have that Yahweh gave the Torah, or that gods in other religion gave the moral codes attributed to them.


It's not the same as asking whether God exists, or for evidence that God exists. It's a narrower question, one that doesn't negate the existence of your God. You're confusing the two to avoid answering.

Now that I've clarified it, answer it, or admit your position rests on faith, not evidence.

You believe God or gods gave moral codes. My position is that humans created those moral codes found in religion and attribute it to gods to give them authority so ordinary humans would obey them.

LordReed:
It bothers me because the people prejudiced against him are offering up unnecessary harm. It is their actions that would be immoral not his tattoos.

Moral fibre is borne by conscious thinking beings, religious or otherwise. I know for us as humans we are the ones making moral judgement calls and all evidence points to it. You on the otherhand think an external agency is involved but can present nothing valid to support such a claim.

Yes, that is it.

SIRTee is convinced an external agency, his God, is responsible for the things he says and does, and wants everyone else to belief it too.

SIRTee15:
U guys don't get. why will he suffer societal prejudice and why does that bother u. u people just keep dancing around the loop. come out and admit u benefit from the moral fibre established by religious belief.
no one will bite u.

.No. You're the one caught in a logical loop of your own making . And that's why you keep shifting the goalpost because you can't provide evidence for your original claim that all morality comes from God. Your latest retreat is "moral fibre established by religious belief" But what exactly is this religious belief? You can't answer because answering would end the debate.

Benefitting from something in religion doesn't mean it came from God. And I already told you that there are non -theistic religion. We benefit from Greek philosophy and Arabic mathematics without believing in Jupiter, Athena or Allah. Or do you believe in Allah since you benefit from the mathematics the Islamic world gave us?If you don't, then by your own logic you're an hypocrite since you reject Allah and Islam.

The atheist or agnostic hasn't rejected everything religion has produced. We reject or not convinced that gods authored the moral codes in religion.. Everything else religion has produced, its art, philosophy or its moral wisdom, we can take on its own merits, the same way we take Greek philosophy or Arabic mathematics. Until you understand that, you'll keep demanding that we justify your own belief for you. And that makes no sense.

LordReed:
LoLz. I no longer bother myself responding to him because everybody he interacts with just ends in the pigeon on the chessboard situation.

I have blocked him. He wants to gaslight me to accept his confusion .

LordReed:
Your question seems to be mixing moral values, cultural mores and personal taste. People's perception of tattoos and piercings is not a moral value judgement, it is a cultural and/or personal one. I personally do not like tattoos or piercings but I don't see the people who do so as immoral so my objection to my daughter marrying such a person is not because I think the person is immoral. I would object not only for my personal distaste but also because she and the children they likely have will suffer needless societal prejudice.

SIRTee would reject what you just explained, even though it isn't much different from my own position.

His question rests on an assumption that atheists/irreligious can feel moral outrage but cannot justify it, and that any moral standard the irreligious appeal to is borrowed from religion, not reason, empathy or social instincts. That's why he ends with "what is the source of this objection?" In other words, "where does the atheist morality come from?" . His answer is, It can only be religion or God. The atheist reject God. To him, that makes them hypocrites for practicing what they condemn.

As it is now, we're debating someone locked into the false belief that all morality can only come from God, a belief he has never evidenced but only asserted.

Dtruthspeaker:
Your saying you never said so even after i showed you your own words, and the fact that both i and sirtee responded to that implication, is proof of it. I wonder the day you would ever stop lying..

The beginning of the thread sirtee already told us his position and beliefs and that he was putting it aside to hear from atheists the source of their morality

And I was already done if not for the fact that you were lying, yet again

You're hallucinating. When did SIRTee come to confirm your *implication " after you said so on this page?

He has not. So who is lying between the two of us?. The page hasn't moved. We are still here and anyone following can confirm he's yet to appear on the thread after your false accusation.

You need to check yourself. Something is really wrong with you. I blame myself for engaging you in the first place.

Dtruthspeaker:
Yes, this is his end point of his claim but this part is not in issue as i already told you that you were not addressing the aim of the thread being that in the opening of this thread says, he has put his claim and belief aside to ascertain the source of atheists morality.




Now you are lying for you were implied that Buddhism was not a religion which is why both of us pointed out that Buddhism is a religion which you have now corrected. So, no need lying

You keep repeating you're "lying" because you can't show where I said it. I never said so, or implied it. I said Buddhism is a religion without a creator God who gives commands. That's what I said, and never corrected it.

I'm done with you.

Modified. And nothing like *end point to his claim". "SIRTee15 retreated to" morality comes from religion" because he couldn't provide evidence for his main argument that "all morality comes from God " A person with one true position doesn't need two. He's arguing deceptively and you're defending him because you're clueless about what he's doing.

Dtruthspeaker:
He has 2 positions
1) morality comes from religion. (His belief but he has kept it aside to ask atheists about their source of morality)

Please allow him to speak for himself. You have misstated his position. His claim is not merely that "morality comes from religion". His claim is that morality comes from God or gods, that atheists/agnostics reject God while borrowing the morality he gave through religion, and therefore hypocrites. That's what I have been responding to. If you can't state it accurately you can't defend it.

And

2) that your Buddhism is a religion

And see, your words below proves you have changed your statement for you implied that Buddhism is not a religion

I was the one who informed you Buddhism has no creator God who gives commands. So how can the *ignorance be on me " If you had known this from the beginning, you wouldn't have cited Buddhism as proof that morality comes from religion

No. The obvious implication of my statement is that Buddhism is a religion without a creator God who gives commands, not that Buddhism isn't a religion. If that distinction is too subtle for you, there's nothing further to discuss, because you won't make sense of anything else either.

Dtruthspeaker:
You have already finished proving him right, so you can't deny it.

Secondly, Google says the
A+
1Buddhism is a religion Buddhism is widely classified as a major world religion

You're still missing the point. Tell me what his position is that you insist I've "finished proving". You can't because you don't know..

And where did I say Buddhism is not a religion?. I didn't. I said Buddhism is a religion with no creator God who gives commands. That's the point. You're arguing against something I never claimed.

Let SIRTee15 defend his own position. If you reply with another strawman, I'll ignore you.

Dtruthspeaker:
All these sources you mentioned are still religious based, so, you are still standing with Sirtee and proving him right

No. I haven't proved him right. Religion is man -made, not God -made. SIRTee15 claims all morality is from God or gods. Those aren't the same thing. Even if all my sources were "religious based" that only shows religion shaped me ,not that God authored the codes.

And do you have evidence gods authored those moral codes in religion, apart from the belief they did? This is the question your friend has refused to answer.

SIRTee15:
So are u a cultural Christian?

No, I'm not. I grew up exposed to agnosticism, ATR, Christianity, and later Eckankar. Multiple sources, not one, shaped my human personality. That's the normal human condition, and it's exactly what I've argued here: morality can come from many sources.

And that's why I reject your description of my morality as "Christianised". It isn't made of one thing.

SIRTee15:
Mr Man, Buddhism is a religion. pure and simple. and people who follow it derive their morality from the religious ethics of Buddhism.
not all religion has a supreme deity, that ignorance is on u.

and no u didnt answer my question. u only said your daughter will bring u shame if she becomes an onlyfan model.
How? why? that's what I'm interested in.
guy we all know why, let's not pretend to ourselves.
u have been indoctrinated with christianised values and morals, and your definition of decency shaped by it.
having a daughter sell her body for money is immoral and a big shame in the values u grew up within. And that's why u will protest if your daughter chose to become onlyfan model.
otherwise, I see no reason to object to it.
bye

Just go away. You've been projectimg from start to finish and you're never going to make sense. I was the one who informed you Buddhism has no creator God who gives commands. So how can the *ignorance be on me " If you had known this from the beginning, you wouldn't have cited Buddhism as proof that morality comes from religion. Now you're scrambling and pretending you knew all along.

You've now agreed with me anyway. You said Buddhism is a religion whose followers derive morality from its religious ethics, not from a creator God's commands. That's my entire point. Morality can also come from outside a creator God. You conceded it and called it my ignorance .

The strange thing is that you, a Christian , now finds Buddhism a valid religion all because you needed it to score a point.

As for the rest you didn't answer my question. I asked what evidence you have that God gave those moral codes apart from belief. . Your deflection to Europe, Onlyfans, to Buddhism and now to a "bye" is not a win, but you running away , leaving the tracks behind..

And here's the thing you're leaving behind as you run . You said I was "indoctrinated with Christianised values" , meaning you think I have moral values, and that I got them from culture and upbringing, not from God. That's exactly what I told you from the beginning. You just prove my case while trying to insult me.

Modified. Atheism is simply the rejection of God or gods, not the rejection of everything religion. Don't confuse the two. Many atheist/agnostics still model parts of their lives on religious moral teaching because they recognise the wisdom in it. Richard Dawkings one of the world's most famous atheists called himself a "cultural Christian" He rejected God, but didn't reject the moral tradition. What he rejected is the claim that God is the source of it, or that you need God in order to follow it. Elon Musk has also spoken positively about the teachings of Jesus.

SIRTee15:
.

pls go and read about buddhism b4 exposing your ignorance. budhism teaches humans thru enlightement can attain ultimate transcendental reality. That's a supernatural statement

Yes, Buddhism is a religion. It is not a mere philosophy. It has gods, demons, deities, spirits, ghosts, heaven, hell, rituals, liturgy, worship, prayers, practices, eschatology, soteriology, sacred texts, monastics, etc. Yes, Buddhists believe in gods, many gods. Only the uncreated Creator God is denied.

I never said Buddhism has nothing to do with the transcendent nor did I call it mere philosophy. I said it has no creator God who gave commands. That's correct. And you just admitted it yourself "only the uncreated God is denied" . That's my entire point. A moral system without a creator God.

Yes, Buddhism has deities in its cosmology, but none of then are the uncreated God who hands down commands like Yahweh. Morality in Buddhism, comes from karma, compassion, reasoning the Eightfold Path, not divine commands. So my points stands. You're the one who has displayed ignorance here.

europe is sinking my friend, u are only decieving yourself by denying it. The beginning of the end came for europe when they rejected christianity and embrace liberal secularism as their source of morality .

Europe falling apart is emotional appeal. You're trying to scare and confuse your followers, not me, with images of a collapsing Europe instead of answering the questions I asked. It's a deflection. It doesn't prove your claim that morality can only come from God or religion

I haven't denied Europe has problems. I said deal with your own country's problems first and leave those who have systems in place to deal with theirs.

And you continue to ignore Sweden and Denmark, European countries, that have high moral standards of living and low crime without your God.

Guy u are not answering my question. why is your daughter doing onlyfan bringing shame to u!!!!
that's my question u have refused to answer. Why are u embarrased by ur daughter selling her body online!!!!!
There are so many onlyfans model that have good relationship with their parents.
Read sophie Rain the onlyfan celebrity star, she earn 40 million dollars per year and her mum fully supports her business.
Courtney Clenney, that onlyfans girl that killed her Nigerian boyfriend has good relationship with her parents who both supported her during her trial and ordeal.
what the heck are u talking about!!!!
stop judging the world with your heavily influenced christianised morality. what u consider shame is perfectly normal for millions who derive their morality from liberal secularism

and FYI- lots of jobs cause mental stress. infact underemployment is the biggest trigger for job related depression in the world, and not onlyfans.

I have answered the question you asked about your daughter doing Onlyfans and bringing shame and embarrassment to you and your entire family members. Don't pretend you didn't read it.

SIRTee15:
What is the harm in your daughter becoming an only fans model. What harm is she doing to herself, you or the society by choosing to become an only fan model.
That's the crux of my question. Mention the harm your daughter is exposed to by becoming an only fan.
And what makes u consider that harm immoral? .

What is the source of that morality?.

You have a limited understanding of harm. It isn't only physical, psychological harm is real. It doesn't just impact one's mental health, it can affect the individual's overall well-being . If your daughter does something that brings shame and distress to your family she's harming you whether she realises it or not. She's an extension of yourself; her actions affect everyone around her. No family with a name to protect would feel at ease if their daughter got involved in Onlyfans, and the pressure is usually immense on the person involved, guilt and rejection affect her mental health. Some Onlyfans models have spoken about regretting the embarrassment they cause their families. They are aware of the effect of their actions on others.

So, when you say you see no harm in it, I have to wonder if you're arguing from principle or from something else?. You seem very invested in defending a position that, by your own moral framework, you should be condemning

Japan is a religious country, they practice Buddhism.

Yes, Japan practice Buddism, but the religion is non-theistic. It rejects the idea of a creator God who Issues commandments, judges or punishes. Its moral framework is based on karma, compassion and human experience , not divine command. . The Buddha himself taught that believing in gods or God is not useful for those seeking enlightenment.

So, if you accept Buddism as valid, you have admitted morality can exist without your God.. If you reject the religion as demonic then you can't use it to support your argument. Either way you're contradicting yourself and that is the hypocrisy you keep accusing me of
.

Europe is falling apart in our very eyes. They can't even get immigration laws right.
Since Europe embrace liberal secularism as their source of morality, it's just becoming a mess of a place very passing year. Crime is rising, social order is collapsing, lawlessness is becoming rampant, poverty is rising, mental health crisis is now an excuse to go on disability and claim benefit .

It's just a matter of time it becomes the a good example for dystopia.

I'd advise you to concern yourself with your country first. You're worried about Europe while ignoring Nigeria, a country with a large Christian and Muslim population that is nonetheless one of the most dangerous places to live in the world. The problem you see in Europe is far worse in your country.

Mental health crises are worse in Nigeria than in those countries, but you don't know because Nigerians hardly prioritise mental health. Your youths are consuming cocktails of mind-destroying drugs, while your government has no plan to deal with the problem. Yet you're concerned about Europe, where systems are in place to deal with their own Issues.

Still waiting for your answer to the question I asked: Apart from belief, what evidence do you have Yahweh gave the Torah?

SIRTee15:
You see, they never answer questions. when their hypocrisy is shoved up their face. They start their whataboutism and start arguing questions never asked them.

No.I haven't displayed any hypocrisy. You don't seem to know what the word means. Hypocrisy is claiming one standard and living by another one. I haven't condemned morality while practicing it. I have never said people shouldn't be moral. I have maintained that morality comes from empathy, social instincts, reasoning, culture and human experience . I live by that. There's no contradiction.

And no, I'm not "arguing questions never asked". I'm asking you to justify your claim about the source of morality. That's directly to the point. That's not whataboutism . I told you the source of my morality. You don't just like the answer, so you ignored it and moved on to personal hypotheticals.

I thought triplechoice morality comes from human instinct and empathy, so why should he protest his daughter becoming onlyfans model or working as a adult movie star in corn industry.
Awon oniro, fake people everywhere..

This is the point you're not listening to yourself. You're mocking me for having moral standards based on empathy and social instincts, while demanding that I must have moral standards.

If you're struggling to understand it, empathy means I care about my daughter's well-being. Social instincts mean I want to protect those close to me. That's exactly why I would speak up if I thought she was making a harmful choice. A person who doesn't care what happens to their child isn't more moral, they're less moral..

I'm not pretending to be something I'm not. I don't subscribe to your God. I still try to live a decent live. That's not fake, that's just a human being with a different world view than yours.. You seem to think secular morality means anything goes.. It doesn't. Secular morality says, consider harm, consider well -being, consider fairness, consider what kind of society we want. Those are real standards. And they can absolutely lead me to say, "I don't want this for my daughter"

Now that I've answered the question you assumed I was ruining away from, I hope you'Ii return the favour by answering mine.

What evidence do you have, apart from belief that Yahweh gave those moral codes?

As we can see, atheists benefit from a moral society structured on religious moral framework. They love the morals the religion brings, the good upbringing the religion gives to children and the social order the religion teach. THEY ALL LOVE IT EVEN THOUGH THEY DENY IT.

But yet will open their mouth and condemn the WONDERFUL SUPREME GOD that gave humanity such beautiful morals.
If this is not hypocrisy, I don't know what else to call it.

You're conflating two different things. I can acknowledge that religion has done good things, built hospitals, schools, charities and promoted social order , without believing in irs gods. I don't have to believe a tree was planted by a god before I can appreciate its fruit.. I don't also have to believe in Yahweh to appreciate the good parts of Christian moral teaching.


Religion is not the only source of morality. Secular societies like Sweden, Denmark, and Japan have some of the highest standards of living, lowest crime rates and strongest social trust in the world. If religion were the only source of morality those societies should be failing apart. But they're not

SIRTee15:
Good, then use your highlighted PRINCIPLES to determine if below acts are moral or not.

1. If your 16-year-old daughter starts taking contraceptive pills so she can have sex with her boyfriend, would you frown at it? On what grounds would you consider her behaviour immoral?

2. If your 21-year-old son tells you he is gay and wants to marry his partner, will you wish them marital bliss or attend their wedding if invited? If you object to such a union, where is that morality coming from?

3. If your 18-year-old son tells you he is transitioning to become a woman and plans to undergo surgery, on what grounds would you tell him he is wrong?

4. Why would it be wrong if your 25-year-old daughter tells you she does not plan to get married but intends to have children with different men and raise them without a father figure?

Now apply those your principles to determine the morality of the cases above- pls do not go outside because u clearly stated your morality is based on the said objectives- empathy, social instinct, human experience, and culture

So explain to me why u would object to the above if u are living in a society where above cases are perfectly legal and acceptable by the society.

I'm not obligated to answer personal hypotheticals about my children. They're irrelevant to the actual question, which is , what is the source of morality?

But look at what your questions assume: that if I don't condemn these things, I've proven your point. That's not true. My morality isn't a checklist of things your God forbids. It's based on empathy, reason, social instincts and human being. I can evaluate each case on those grounds without needing a divine command.

More importantly, your questions are a distraction. You haven't answered the question I asked you: what evidence do you have that Yahweh actually gave the Torah, apart from the belief that he did?

Until you answer that, you're the one dodging. Your position rests on faith, not evidence. That's ok if you admit it. But you can't demand I justify my morality while refusing to justify your claim.

QuinQQ:
With due respect, you people should stop disgracing Christians by clinging to this rather stu pid argument. There are many other ways you can attack atheists and they'll have no response - example, where did all this come from?
RELIGION IS NOT THE ONLY SOURCE OF MORALITY!!!!
If you raise a child not to steal, he won't steal and never tie it to religion, he won't steal!
Proverbs 22:6 even says exactly that:
"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it"!
Besides humans having inate morality, it can also come from self-interest, fear, etc
I can't believe, of all things, this is what you folks choose to argue!




Don't mind that guy. He annoyingly talks as if he's looking down from some sort of pedestal, yet he doesn't know what he's talking about!

He certainly doesn't know what he's talking about.

SIRTee15:
I'm not here to debate evidence for religion. That's what u guys do all the time. Deflect and refuse to answer question.

Whether Moses and YHWH exist is not the argument here. Jews believe the source of their morality is derived from the 10 commandment- a religious text. Simple.

Atheist will say there's no God. Fine. Then tell us what is the source of your own morality independent of a God.

Why would u disagree if your 23 yr old daughter decides she wants to build a career in adult movie industry and become a 'corn' star or only fan model.

Why would u consider such act immoral.

That'sy question atheist have failed to answer in previous thread and that have started their whataboutism again.

Pls unless u give a direct answer to my simple question I will not deem u a response.
I'm done with argument already. Answer or STAY SILENT AND ALLOW THE SILENCE BECOME LOUDER.

You say you're not here to debate evidence for religion . Good. Then admit that your claim, "morality comes from God" , is a statement of faith, not something you can prove.

I'm not an atheist. I'm agnostic/irreligious I don't really use labels. I simply agreed with QuinnQQ that morality comes from empathy, social instincts reasoning, culture and shared human experience. That's the source of my morality. You haven't addressed that. You just repeated that Jews believe their morality comes from the ten commandments.

I don't dispute what Jews believe. I reject the claim that their belief proves God gave it.

My morality is grounded in human well-being , empathy, reason, and social cooperation. Yours is grounded in religious belief. You're at liberty to hold yours. But you can't claim it's the only source and you can't demand I adopt it without evidence. Period.

SIRTee15:
If u dont know the history of religion, I will advise u educate yourself and cure your ignorance. organised religion were well established thousands of years b4 the Abrahamic religion and there were well known moral codes governing those societies b4 God gave Moses the torah.
There is no known moral code that exist outside of a religious framework- none. all morality are shaped by religious belief system- be it ancient or modern

Below are ancient moral codes that existed even before God gave Moses the 10 commandment. All of them governed ancient civilizations and were based off beliefs in gods and attributed to them.


1. Ma’at moral code, c. 3100–300 BCE. Ancient Egypt; attributed to Ma’at, goddess of truth, justice, and cosmic order.

2. The Code of Ur-Nammu, c. 2100–2050 BCE. Sumer, Mesopotamia; attributed to Nanna/Sin, the moon god, patron deity of Ur.

3. Code of Hammurabi (first legal code known to mankind) c. 1754 BCE. Babylon, Mesopotamia; attributed to Shamash, god of justice and the sun, who gave the laws to King Hammurabi.

4. Hittite Laws, c. 1650–1500 BCE. Hittite Empire, Anatolia; attributed to The Storm God, Teshub, and the Hittite divine order

5. The 10 commandment Mosaic Law / Torah traditionally c. 1300–1200 BCE; attributed to Yahweh, who is described as giving the laws to Moses

6. Avesta / Zoroastrian moral law, teachings traditionally c. 1200–600 BCE; texts compiled later Ancient Persia/Iran; attributed to Ahura Mazda, supreme God of truth and wisdom

I REPEAT, THERE IS NO MORAL VALUES DEVELOPED INDEPENDENTLY OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF SYSTEM ANYWHERE. PEOPLE IN ANCIENT TIMES BELIEVED THE gods GAVE THEM THOSE MORAL CODES AS A WAY TO WORSHIP AND PLEASE THEM. THERE IS NO ANCIENT CIVILISATION THAT DEVELOPED ITS MORALITY OUTSIDE A RELIGIOUS FRAMEWORK- NONE

anybody arguing against this is simply ignorant.

You didn't directly answer QuinnQQ's point. He said empathy, social instincts, reasoning and culture are the sources of morality. I agree.

Instead of responding to that, you posted a list of written codes But written codes aren't the same as moral capacity or moral knowledge. Even the Christian Bible says Gentiles without the law have the law "written on their hearts" (Romans 2 :14-15)

The list you provided doesn't prove all morality comes from God or the gods. It only shows what ancient people believed, or were made to believe about the source of their moral codes. You haven't provided evidence that any god actually gave them.

And since you included Yahweh in the same list, by your own standard, that's just another belief too.

So I ask, What evidence do you have that Yahweh actually gave the Torah, apart from the belief that he did.?

LZAA:
My friend
No other tribe does this
Infact people who actually have been to other regions in Nigeria know this
Stop shifting goalposts here
That being said Omotola was rightly checked by her Director
Actors help each other
They do not claim to be superior to any one
Clint Eastwood used to coach actors
Al pacino did the same
What Omotola did was a disgrace
You can try and deflect all you want but the truth CHANGES for no one
Now GTHOH

As far as I'm concern, you have nothing against me. Continue to assume about me if it makes you feel good about yourself.


Here's just one evidence if you aren't too lazy to read.
https://www.nairaland.com/8542373/fiba-denies-ngozi-ogwumikes-bid/2#137170524

*People judge because they cannot think"

Carl Sagan

Fekumzi123:
He just told you the simple truth in all of these. There's no special files anywhere.
He was an accountant and drug dealers opened accounts under him.
When they were caught, their money was traced to accounts under Tinubu.
He can easily convert those money to his but the FBI came and requested for them.
He gave the money up because they're not his and if he insisted they can arrest him believing he's an accomplice.
There's no files anywhere that can indict Tinubu.
If you like don't believe. You're on your own

Where did you get this story from ?

Is it corroborated by the FBI who has his files ? Yes or No

LZAA:
I already did
Only yorubas still use this slur "ibo"

No. You haven't. I asked concerning what Omotola said,not on the use of the word Ibo.

And it's not true only Yorubas use it. I have seen other tribes used the word since they don't know the difference.

I'm not engaged in any tribal war with you,so how does it make sense to use the word to degenerate your tribe.
Common sense should have told you it was an innocent mistake. If you disagree that's your cup of tea and it won't help you to prove your point.
Check my profile to confirm I'm have never been part of the tribal banter between both tribes on Nairaland.

LZAA:
Still Yoruba
Nigerians know this

We are not debating tribe but what Omotola said. Focus on that and prove me wrong or you forget it

author=LZAA post=140623926]
"Ibos"
My gee you are yoruba
The middle belt,South South and North never ever type "ibo"
Happy weekend

No, LZAA, I insist I'm not.

However, I just Google it and can confirm that you're absolutely correct about the use of Ibo. Igbo is the modern acceptable word while Ibo is colonial.
I was taught this in secondary School long ago but no longer remember that.

So it was an honest mistake not intended as a deliberate tribal insult. I apologize for that error. I detest anything that has to do with colonialism especially the modern one. I will drop that that word never to use it again. Honestly speaking I'm from Niger Delta.

Let's focus on the substance of the debate without bringing tribe into it.

Prove to me that what she did was wrong without viewing it through a tribal lens.

ceejay80s:
Leave story oga body too dey pepper una,
Someone said ewo in a yoruba movie, is ewoo a word or just reaction?
Someone says eyaahhh is it a language? All tribes say it due to one reason, it's not a language, let me buy data for u so u can play the video online and stop claiming what's not true,
Did morgan freeman not potray Mandela movie, was he speaking like South Africans,
Did South Africans complain,
Una go carry una wahala go disgrace una sef in USA
USA don't give a fnck , all they know is u are Nigerian

See your problem now?
You think I'm Yoruba when I'm not. The most tribalistic tribes in Nigeria, are the Ibos and the Yorubas yes . And that's why it's easy for you people to give tribal coloration to anything that involves the two of you.

Omotola is talking about standard and respect for an indigenous African language. Instead of you to focus on that and demand foreigners show respect to our culture, you choose to attack her and accuse her of what she's not guilty of.

In the Mandela movie,Morgan Freeman wasn't doing the same thing Omotola complained. It's not about accent. It's about mixing of languages, which is odd.

You claimed to have watched the video, yet you struggle to understand what she complained of. SMH

AerialMapper:
So from what I understood…

They were providing background sounds perhaps for a movie and the Igbo woman was lamenting in Igbo rather shouting ewoooo which was not the local language fit for the production.

Omotola being a superstar in trying ensure accuracy in the production, rather than approach her Nigerian colleague and tell her to use the pidgin language or teach her what to say instead went to the African-American … perhaps not only to correct the error but to also be a notice-me and she was disappointed that her observation didn’t matter is in the end.

I saw a clip of her acting as an Igbo princess or whatever and she was murdering the language but there was no outcry about it or anybody asking why use her instead of a native actor… e reach her turn, she turn herself to historical gatekeeper

The Ibo lady wasn't the script writer or could speak either language very well

So how does it make sense to correct someone like that who was deliberately or unintentionally misleading the production crew because she knew they wouldn't know the difference?

Has Omotola ever tried to mix Yoruba with Ibo while acting in Nollywood?No.

ceejay80s:
The 1978 movie Jesus of Nazareth was england and Italian stars acted it not Israel,
Most movies u see of Americans fighting ISlamic nations are all American who acted them, black panther is American not African movie,
I have seen so many movies where they potray a person as Nigerian and he's not,
She's not the director of the movie, she should just face what she's thee for,
Are u telling me that Hollywood don't know where to find a yoruba for that role?
Hollywood is only seeing a Nigerian portraying that role not yoruba not hausa,
Na we dey divide this country by ourselves not the wes,
Omotola should just act , get paid and get off

You're the one now tribalising the issue.

Anyone can take on any role. It doesn't matter. What matters is that they try as much possible to portray the role accurately. In this case, the Ibo person was born in the diaspora and even struggle to speak the Ibo language very well.


The issue is about the mixing of Yoruba and Ibo, not why an Ibo person should be allowed to play the role of a Yoruba person.

Omotola wasn't against an Ibo person playing that role. She was against the misrepresentation of a major Nigerian language. That's all.