Many religious people say that Atheists have no reason to be moral. Do you think that's true?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Religion has nothing to do with morality. If I was to follow THE BOOK id be stoning women and killing gay people now. Atheists are people and thus they have a moral code.rzepakLOL. Yea i recall doesnt it say in the bible that women should follow their mens orders and are not allowed to speak in church bcuz its a sin. Is that wut christians mean by morals?
kids need to be told how to behave because they haven't developed empathy and social conscious. Religion is a great answer for "why should I?" but then again, so is, "because Santa won't bring you any presents".
Fortunately about the time they work out Santa is fake, they have the brain capacity to know hurting others isn't nice. And a few years after that is the crucial religious questioning, hence all these OT topics.
Obviously not, or athiests would all be in prison for various crimes.ithilgore2006But they obviously fear law.:?
[QUOTE="ithilgore2006"]Obviously not, or athiests would all be in prison for various crimes.Thinker_rebornBut they obviously fear law.:? Laws are in place to uphold that countries fundamental and moral principles, which is why they differ from country to country. Just because someone doesn't believe in a deity doesn't mean they don't have empathy or a conscience.
I agree. Atheists have no reason to be moral, and yet, a surprising amount of them have morals. Go figure.Genetic_CodeI guess that makes athiests better people :P We dont need to be threatened to be decent human beings :D
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]I agree. Atheists have no reason to be moral, and yet, a surprising amount of them have morals. Go figure.II_Seraphim_III guess that makes athiests better people :P We dont need to be threatened to be decent human beings :D That would depend on your philosophy on morality. :o
No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.Bourbons3Obviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people.
I'd like to ask them the same thing. Why be moral when all you gotta is pray for forgiveness. dracula_16Cause obviously, when you ask for forgiveness you have to actually mean it in your heart. If i don't ACTUALLY feel sorry for doing evil, it's not a real apology is it?
[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.Stumpt25Obviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people. You are way above the head of most people in this discussion. Good point, though.
[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.Stumpt25Obviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people. Yeah. It's quite a silly argument really.
Obviously not, or athiests would all be in prison for various crimes.ithilgore2006Heh, way to end all arguments with the first post... Despite this being on the second page. :|
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Bourbons3"]No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.jointedObviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people. Yeah. It's quite a silly argument really. Not really... it's fact...
Many religious people say that Atheists have no reason to be moral. Do you think that's true?
X4D
Hello there. :)
Atheists reason to be moral is that it feels good to do the right thing.
I think if there was a God, he would probably prefer the company of atheists, to those of religious faith, simply due to the atheists inner-driven desire to be good, in contrast to a person of faith, who most likely is only doing what they have been told to do, for the rewards they have been promised upon their physical demise. I think God would rather spend time with people that didn't need to be bribed into a compassionate lifestyle, as that seems to indicate emotional or "spirtual" weakness.
But since there is no God anyway, as everything is one, this doesn't really matter. My take on the subject is, that an atheist's reason to be moral is clearly superior to the reasons of religious people. It's an honorable person, who lives righteously by his own choosing, instead of being coerced with goodies and eternal pain-free parties at the end of the physical cycle.
Now, I'm not suggesting this is going to happen, because it won't, but, wouldn't it be funny if that was the test all along? If we all got to heaven one day and God tells the religious ones that they have failed due to the fact that they were so weak they needed to be bribed into righteousness, and he lets all the atheists in due to their unselfish dedication to living a respectable life, whether or not they were going to be rewarded? Of course this won't happen, but it's an amusing scenario nontheless. It's an ironic image that makes me laugh every time it pops into my mind. :lol:
yup obviously cuz u need to have read the bible to feel sorry, feel compasionate, feel remorse and all human emotions only infests itself into sum1 after readin the bible ............rs0101That's strange! I haven't read the bible but I have felt those things... Could you be... let's say... wrong? Let's put it in another way. Someone feels compassion about me. Will I appreciate it more if I know he is doing it just because his God told him so or because his own judgement and experiences have taught him so? Do those feelings have any meaning if they don't come out of each person's own consideration and care and come just from obeying a code of behaviour that only knows the words "must"? You'll rightfuly say that not everyone cares on his own and perhaps he should read the bible but that doesn't make atheists a moral threat.
[QUOTE="ithilgore2006"]Obviously not, or athiests would all be in prison for various crimes.Thinker_rebornBut they obviously fear law.:?Yes, they're all just afraid of the law, they want nothing more than to commit crimes. Now religious people, on the other hand, they're definitely model citizens simply out of the goodness of their hearts, it's not like they're only following their respective book's "morals" so they can get into heaven or anything.
[QUOTE="dracula_16"]I'd like to ask them the same thing. Why be moral when all you gotta is pray for forgiveness. Stumpt25Cause obviously, when you ask for forgiveness you have to actually mean it in your heart. If i don't ACTUALLY feel sorry for doing evil, it's not a real apology is it?Well OBVIOUSLY (?) when a religious person says he/she feels something (remorse etc) he/she ALWAYS means it, but an atheist by far won't mean it... right? Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any. That kind of categorization is at least unfair.
[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"][QUOTE="ithilgore2006"]Obviously not, or athiests would all be in prison for various crimes.ithilgore2006But they obviously fear law.:?Yes, they're all just afraid of the law, they want nothing more than to commit crimes. Now religious people, on the other hand, they're definitely model citizens simply out of the goodness of their hearts, it's not like they're only following their respective book's "morals" so they can get into heaven or anything. You're missing the strength of this guy's arguement, then you totally contradict yourself. Atheists CAN be moral AND afraid of law at the same time. in the same way Religious people CAN be moral AND want to go to heaven. It's not like without god, all religious people would turn into savages. And likewise, it's not like without the law that atheists can't be good... P.s. You have no idea how insulting it is to have you say that all good religious people are closet a-holes, just doing good for self interest.
[QUOTE="ithilgore2006"][QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]But they obviously fear law.:?Stumpt25Yes, they're all just afraid of the law, they want nothing more than to commit crimes. Now religious people, on the other hand, they're definitely model citizens simply out of the goodness of their hearts, it's not like they're only following their respective book's "morals" so they can get into heaven or anything. You're missing the strength of this guy's arguement, then you totally contradict yourself. Atheists CAN be moral AND afraid of law at the same time. in the same way Religious people CAN be moral AND want to go to heaven. It's not like without god, all religious people would turn into savages. And likewise, it's not like without the law that atheists can't be good... P.s. You have no idea how insulting it is to have you say that all good religious people are closet a-holes, just doing good for self interest. I was just throwing his argument back at him, seeing as I felt fairly insulted myself that he claimed they're merely "afraid of the law". No need to take it as a blanket statement.
[QUOTE="rs0101"]yup obviously cuz u need to have read the bible to feel sorry, feel compasionate, feel remorse and all human emotions only infests itself into sum1 after readin the bible ............TeenagedThat's strange! I haven't read the bible but I have felt those things... Could you be... let's say... wrong? Let's put it in another way. Someone feels compassion about me. Will I appreciate it more if I know he is doing it just because his God told him so or because his own judgement and experiences have taught him so? Do those feelings have any meaning if they don't come out of each person's own consideration and care and come just from obeying a code of behaviour that only knows the words "must"? You'll rightfuly say that not everyone cares on his own and perhaps he should read the bible but that doesn't make atheists a moral threat.
Hello there. :)
You are on the right track. Compassion that comes from an individual's own motivation is genuine. Compassion that comes from indoctrination is about as flimsy as the pages of the book they got their "morals" from.
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="dracula_16"]I'd like to ask them the same thing. Why be moral when all you gotta is pray for forgiveness. TeenagedCause obviously, when you ask for forgiveness you have to actually mean it in your heart. If i don't ACTUALLY feel sorry for doing evil, it's not a real apology is it?Well OBVIOUSLY (?) when a religious person says he/she feels something (remorse etc) he/she ALWAYS means it, but an atheist by far won't mean it... right? Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any. That kind of categorization is at least unfair. huh? did i ever say that atheists can't give a genuine apology? secondly, how do you know whether a religious person asked for forgiveness dishonestly? Did they say to you "I prayed for forgiveness for committing adultery but i didn't mean it lol!" or something...... just seems wierd thing for you to know....
[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.Stumpt25Obviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people.hidden assumptions in number 4- that there is an objective morality, and that people who believe in objective morality have the right version of it. :P
Despite what many people believe, religion didn't "invent" morality. What people think is "moral" is a simple biological instinct early man had that would ensure the survival of themselves and others around them. After all, if you killed all your tribesmen just for the heck of it, then who's going to help you hunt that Wooly Mammoth for food? Who are you going to reproduce with? Who's going to help protect you from Sabretooth Cats or other human tribes?
I'm not saying that the entirety of morality was based off the works of cavemen, but that what we see as "right" or "wrong" is based off of our own biological intelligence as to what would benefit you and the others around you more. The use of a caveman example is just a representation of humanity at it's most basic form. When society had evolved towards something greater, so had morality; the ideas of stealing, rape, etc being "wrong" by most societies was taken into consideration and now most people across the world find such actions to be wrong. Not all groups do, however, since morality is subjective.
Also, who cares if somebody has "a reason" to be moral or not? The fact that said people are acting moral (regardless of believing in a religion or not) shows that they have enough intelligence and willpower to overcome such a primitive mindset. I'd respect somebody more if they followed moral guidelines because they felt it was right rather than if they followed moral guidelines because they feared punishment if they didn't.
[QUOTE="Stumpt25"][QUOTE="Bourbons3"]No, that's not true at all. I take my morals from common sense. I don't need a book to tell me how I should act.Mr_sprinklesObviously, Atheists can be VERY moral people and in many cases they can be even more moral than religious people. But I think the argument made by some religious people is this: 1. If you are an Atheist, you cannot believe in an OBJECTIVE MORALITY 2. If you do not believe in objective morality, you are limited to saying "In my opinion xyz is wrong and evil" rather than "xyz is wrong and evil" 3. This means, that if you are left to choose what you think is 'morally right', you are left to choose something that could conventionally be considered 'morally wrong' 4. If this happens, you could do evil. For example, Stalin probably thought that killing millions of people was a 'good' thing to do. However, if he had a sense of 'objective morality', as is seen in most religious texts, he wouldn't have killed so many people.hidden assumptions in number 4- that there is an objective morality, and that people who believe in objective morality have the right version of it. :P Ok, fair game - 4 is subjective. The other 3 are objective though. 4 only serves as it's logical conclusion --> What i would take away from the equation is 'as is seen in most religious texts', because arguably you could disagree with the morality in religious texts but save that discussion for another time.
[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="Stumpt25"] Cause obviously, when you ask for forgiveness you have to actually mean it in your heart. If i don't ACTUALLY feel sorry for doing evil, it's not a real apology is it?Stumpt25Well OBVIOUSLY (?) when a religious person says he/she feels something (remorse etc) he/she ALWAYS means it, but an atheist by far won't mean it... right? Well I hope you are one of those few religious people that mean what they say and confess cause honestly, I haven't met any. That kind of categorization is at least unfair. huh? did i ever say that atheists can't give a genuine apology? secondly, how do you know whether a religious person asked for forgiveness dishonestly? Did they say to you "I prayed for forgiveness for committing adultery but i didn't mean it lol!" or something...... just seems wierd thing for you to know....It's not all that hard to "read" one's behaviour and I'm not talking about people that are complete strangers to me! Religion is much like a parent. When a child has his parents reminder constantly telling him "do this" "do that" he won't learn to have morals "inside" him but more likely seek out for the parent's consulting. Isn't it time people, like the grown ups they are, acted without the constant reminder of god. OBVIOUSLY (!) some people have felt that are ready to act and to answer to themselves alone. Not because that gives them freedom to do ANYTHING but because they feel mature enough to lead a life without God's watch.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment