> Says who? You? Yup. Your idea of good, is not my idea of good. That we can reach an agreement (compromise), the consensual portion. That good, is often a

> Says who? You? Yup. Your idea of good, is not my idea of good. That we can reach an agreement (compromise), the consensual portion. That good, is often a matter of perspective, and subject to change in hindsight (i.e. a value judgement distorted heavily by the sensorium/ego) is where it is a hallucination. > Again, your entire argument here is hinged on the assumption that all morality originates from religion no, it doesn't. in point of fact, religion arises as a consequence, of the argument. So do gangs/police/armies/nations. Welcome to the morass, of humanity. :) ;) or if you prefer "the road to hell, is paved with "good" intentions". or more succinctly, "hell is other people". > Give me a break with this "mathematical format" nonsense Not a fan of logic? > and condescending smiley faces. condescending? not really. simply commenting on an alternate pathway to arrive at the conclusion, as a consequence rather than a posit. as I am not privy to your actual conversation with said "religious" person, I chose to demonstrate the line of reasoning. But by all means, continue to stick your head up your ass and think its "religion is the only source of goodness" statement, rather than a logical argument, predicated on human psychology and its biases.