July 28, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
06:51
Atheists: Why Do You Not Lie?
|
Time
Text
And replace it with what like a bunch of arsonists who go around burning down buildings saying, Well, they're not constructed very well, and people are supposed to live in what burn down a farmer's fields.
Well, these crops aren't super healthy for you, and replace it with what rip out the heart of virtue and replace it with what with nothing with nothing That's a murder You burn down someone's house
in the middle of a hailstorm and you give them no other accommodation You say well but that house was not perfect Yeah, but it was something it was shelter from the sky And now you drive them out into the open fields in a hailstorm Hail stones the size of golf balls raining down around them,
their bald pates and their children You just kill people if you drive them out of their home with no other home to go to in the harsh elements of this brutal world And if you say, well, Christianity is wrong and the Christian ethics are self-contradictory and it's bad and it's wrong, fine.
Fine.
Then you owe a replacement to the society whose ethics you are destroying.
You owe the society whose ethics you are destroying some new fucking ethics.
But it's all just feels and hedonism and insults.
You know, I keep asking that Atheists, why do you not lie?
Lying is highly advantageous.
Lying is a way to get resources without work, defrauding people, is easier than creating things.
If you can convince people you're a witch doctor and they should give you 10% of their crops so that you'll bring good rains, it's a whole lot easier to twerk in a headdress than it is to grow a year's worth of crops.
Lying is highly profitable.
It's highly advantageous, as is violence throughout almost all of human history.
Why not lie?
It's the easiest and quickest way to get resources.
Well, I don't like it.
That's just hedonism.
What about the people who do like it?
What are you going to say to them?
What about the con men who giggle and enjoy ripping people off, lying to them, stealing from them, through language?
It's safer than actually fighting them physically, right?
Talking them out of stuff.
Talking them out of stuff.
No, no, what they wanted to get rid of was not religion, but moral responsibility.
Because they've carved out the moral heart of the West and replaced it with nothing, which means what they were offended by were moral requirements, not God.
Getting rid of God was just a cover for the true slate of hand, which was getting rid of moral obligations.
And I had this debate, was it yesterday?
And you can listen to it.
On my stream, FDRpodcast.com.
You can also find it at Stefan Molyneux on X 15th.
It's the 16th today, right?
Yeah, it was on the 15th of July, 2025.
And the arrogance, the arrogance is really astounding.
You know, I've had, I think, close to 6 million views on that tweet, thousands and thousands and thousands of replies.
Not one atheist, not one atheist out of the thousands and thousands who've replied, not one atheist has said, you know, that's an interesting question, Steph.
I'm not sure I have a great answer.
Nope.
You all just stand around whacking off into your fedoras and thinking that you've achieved enlightenment?
This is embarrassing.
Because I'm not a bad person.
I don't lie because I'm not a bad person.
It's like, how do you know?
What is a good or bad person?
How do you know what is right or wrong?
And how do you universalize it?
You're all supposed to be about science.
Science is about universalizing things.
If you simply take things from your own emotional perspective, the world looks flat and the sun and the moon look about the same size, about a dime held at arm's length, and they look like they go around the earth, as does the entire universe.
Can't just take your own personal perspective and call it facts and truth?
That's narcissism, solipsism, subjectivism, rank relativism, which is really the goal.
I mean, one of the first public acts that I did, recognizing that Christian morality was being scorned and rejected, one of the first public acts that I did, my very second article that I ever published as a public intellectual, was called Proving Libertarian Morality.
And I set myself the goal of proving secular ethics without reference to the commandments of God or the edicts of a usually corrupt government.
Why?
Because I'm not a selfish asshole.
I'm not someone who drives people out in the snow and laughs at them as they freeze.
I'm not somebody who says, your food is not to my taste.
And I release rats and my own urine on the food stored for the winter.
And then, in December, January, when the family is starving, say, oh, that's too bad.
It's your fault.
And this constant pivot, they won't answer the question.
They will not answer the question.
Why do you not lie?
Well, Christians lie.
Doesn't answer the question.
Why do you not lie?
Well, I don't need a skydaddy to tell me what's right.
Doesn't answer the question.
So blindingly obvious, and they don't even know it.
No self-reflection.
Atheists, do you challenge each other?
Do you sit in circles and examine each other's viewpoints?
Or do you just bag on the fairly intro to philosophy contradictions of religion and say, I'm brilliant!