this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
791 points (98.1% liked)
Comic Strips
22735 readers
2414 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Limit of two posts per person per day.
- Bots aren't allowed.
- Banned users will have their posts removed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes you can... but even if you couldn't, that's not problematic in the slightest for atheists.
Morality is subjective. Some people think invading other countries and killing civilians is fine because their leader convinced them it's a good thing, and others see that as evil. Some people think eating pork is a sin, some couldn't care less. Some people think eating ANY meat is cruel, and many others think it's necessary to live healthily.
But you can objectively measure morality by applying objective criteria. For example, if we agree that someone's well-being is an objective measure to consider when determining if an act is moral or not, then you can make all kinds of objective moral claims. Punching a person/cat in the head? That's immoral because it negatively impacts their well-being. Shooting a cat/person in the head? That's immoral because they will cease to "be" entirely. Treating someone's wounds? Moral, because it positively impacts their well-being. Donating to charity? Moral, positively impacts people's well-being.
What if someone is a pyromaniac and letting them set fires to people's houses improves their wellbeing?
That destroys someone's shelter and potentially injures or kills them. Not to mention the mental grief losing your home causes people. That is not good for their well-being.
(Edit): Also, I'm not even saying it's a good moral system. In fact I don't think it's possible to have an objective moral standard that isn't majorly flawed or incomplete.
I'm saying definitionally we can measure morality objectively, not that it's a good idea.