Athiests, what's your reason for being moral?

Question

Every athiest I've ever met has adhered to (their own) strict moral code.

If you're an athiest with no threat of punishment or no reward to look forward to, what is your reason?

Defensive, defensive!! It's just a simple question but I'm getting accusations and insults sheesh. Many of you don't exactly sound confident.

FIRST HONEST ANSWER goes to PALADIN who asserts that he is moral because it benefits HIM.

If you say you do it out of consideration, love, respect or any other spritual emotion then you either a) attribute these to instincts as a good athiest would or b) admit that we have a spiritual nature.

Now being a good athiest with a limited lifespan and no future you MUST not MAY, MUST commit every selfish act that has no consequences unless you agree with a or b above.

G.B. and Depth of Perception:
Kudos. Your statements are valid as well. Everyone else so far has only unveiled their own spirituality!!! LOL!

Ok, I'll patronize you.
I believe morality comes from a relationship with God. Whether you're Christian or not, everyone has a spiritual side that can recognize right from wrong. The point is that YOU ATHIESTS don't believe that so all you have left is threats and rewards which you DON'T believe either.

...(sigh) so to re-iterate everyone must fall into one of 3 categories:
1. You are amoral and will do anything to benefit yourselves that doesn't have significant consequences.
2. You attribute your morality to instinct.
3. You admit you have a spiritual nature that can recognize right from wrong.

Many here have held high the banner of athiesm while commiting to #3 without realizing it!! LOL!

Oooooh! Looks like I hit a nerve in ol' Captain.
Captain insults me and my faith and tells me that all I do is insult people.
I'm sorry man. Really.
PK? yes? sorry again.

Pretty clear on the flaws of atheism. Thanks for the offer.
Actually you're one of my favs now. At least you admit that it's one of the 3. Wrong, I might add, but honest.

Answer 1

I'm an atheist and I have no morals, if I don't believe in a so called "god" why the hell believe in moral?

Answer 2

Mainly, it's a learned behavior, I would assume. It's the way I was raised, and it helps me to fit into society.

Seeing as how I was a Christian, became an atheist, and my morals only got stronger, one can only surmise that they don't stem from religion.

I always answer this question with a counter question, as the source of morality is not really the point, in my opinion. The point is, that we HAVE morals, even though we are devoid of your god. My question to you is... if it were proven to you tomorrow that god doesn't exist, would you simply go out and start stabbing people? I would hope your answer is no. If so, why not?


And edit upon edit - Yes, I'm describing instinct more or less... your choice # 2... And why do you find that hard to believe? It makes perfect sense. Have you never seen a pack of wolves protect and care for each other? Did god tell them to do that? Your religion is laughably false and empty, as are your arguments. You do nothing but insult, and make your kind look even worse. Quit while you're ahead. :)


Edit - Ah, how nice. Yes, you do hit a nerve. Your ignorance and your arrogance are both extremely offensive to me. Feel free to email me if you'd like to discuss the flaws of atheism. But I warn you, you'll never be the same again. The offer is on the table, pookie. :)

Answer 3

That's a very good question. Since we don't believe we are going to Hell, or are going to be reincarnated as a slug, etc., what's to keep us from just going buck wild and doing whatever we want?

Well, there's the law. This takes care of the biggies, like murder, rape, theft, etc. We know that if we do something society considers to be wrong, there will be consequences. But this is not to suggest that in the absence of law all atheists would go around killing and raping people. That brings me to my next point.

There's respect. Atheists, like most people, know that it sucks to be mistreated, and so try to follow the "golden rule" and treat others the way they would like to be treated.

Finally, there's love. Atheists, just like their religious counterparts, can be driven to extraordinary acts of devotion towards the ones they care for.

Respect, tolerance, and love are human emotions, and are not reserved only for those who believe in God. To think that people can achieve these things only under threat of Hell is a very depressing outlook, indeed.

Answer 4

Wrong, Atheists make up 0.5% of the US poputation!

Who in their right minds thinks an Atheist has no morals!

All they say is they don't believe in God.

That doesn't mean they don't know what is right!

But, sorry, according to statistics Atheists make up on 0.5% of the US population!

Atheists and Agnostics make up 1%, the same as Islamics.

Christians make up closer to 90%

Catholics are the largest single group, followed by generical Baptists, but the most defined Proestant group are the Methodists at about 10%

Answer 5

I'm agnostic I guess. I usually consider myself a theist, but since I'm open to the possibility of being wrong, I guess I'm agnostic.

I don't like hurting people. If you watched someone drop a $20 on the ground, would you keep it just because you wouldn't get caught or would you give it back? I don't like how betraying people's trust makes me feel... so I would give it back.

I really think it's scary if the only reason people don't run around raping and killing is because a 2000 yr old book tells them not to. Yikes!

Answer 6

There is something to live for right here and now. To be truly satisfied with life, one must contribute, not take away. In order to do that, you have to be moral. Besides, it's just the right thing to do. Nobody needs some book or preacher of some kind to tell me that.

I know I have to be all that I can be RIGHT NOW as it is all I will ever have. Being immoral is incompatible with that.

I guess you could say, the punishment is within.

Answer 7

You're avoiding the counter-questions.

Are you a moral person just because you will be rewarded in the afterlife? Do you refrain from hurting others only because you will be punished after death otherwise?

That means you have no morals at all, and you've adjusted your behavior to maximise your benefits. That means you're paying lip service to God.

Answer 8

Interestingly, Christians make up about 75% of the US population and 75% of the US prison population. Atheists make up about 10% of the US population... but they only make up 0.2% of the US prison population. That means that an atheist is 50 TIMES LESS likely to be incarcerated than a Christian. I can think of two possibilities that might reasonably account for this disparity:

1. Atheists of a higher ethical and moral caliber than Christians, and thus do not do the same kinds of nasty things that land so many Christians in jail; or,

2. Atheists are, overall, a lot smarter than Christians, and thus less likely to get caught in the course of their transgressions.

Take your pick. (Personally, I think its a little bit of both.)

Answer 9

Because I have to live among other people.

The reason for morality is to allow people to live near each other in relative peace.

Morality is a set of things we consider good and bad. Each has our own list and it gets modified and applied differently in different situations. When two people interact, they have to first agree on a moral basis, neither of which likely exact to their own. In a society, this is accommodated by the establishment of laws. Laws set a common default moral basis. This is a short cut for people having to agree on one each time they meet.

Two things support this contention. First, hermits don't need any morals. Their actions don't affect anybody. Secondly, if the world were totally destroyed, and all people on it killed, it wouldn't really affect the universe much. Therefore, morals are purely a personal thing. We establish them for ourselves based on our experiences and use them when dealing with other people.

Depending on the relationship you have with another person, the common morality you agree on with them is different. A spouse's morality and your own has to match up a lot more closely and differences have to be worked out a lot more explicitly than, say, a used car salesman buy a car from.

Creating rules for ourselves is part of our human nature. Pur any three people in a room, and they'll establish roles for each other and create rules. This helps establish group bonding and keeps the group together and functional. Generally, morals that evolve over time are a lot stronger than those spoon fed to people. Very rigid moral structures tend to be very brittle. This is because a fixed set of rules rarely applies directly to any specific situation. Moral rules should be heuristics or guidelines. They should guide your actions and be modified as you learn about your environment and other people.

Answer 10

Does morality come from any RATIONAL view of the universe or its cutting-edge scenario or from the sentiments a individual feels? Can any state of a universe be basically rationally favourite over yet another or is it continually a question of our thoughts? Are all thoughts the two valid, e.g. the sensation of a Nazi that Jews are vermin and the sensation of a mundane humanist believing human beings are equivalent? For that rely, is morality innate or found out, a minimum of stimulated by ability of lifestyle? If the Nazis had gained might that had made Naziism any much less morally reprehensible than that's right this moment? If Jesus does not exist does that alter the character or the validity of any the concepts ascribed to him interior the Bible? If God exists what's the inspiration for being ethical if any immoral act will finally be rectified by ability of God, e.g. the wronged individual would be repayed in heaven (Jesus' in call for "Blessed are the susceptible" speech)? Why might killing be immoral if each and every physique gets countless life afterwards (if reality be told you basically helped your sufferer get to heaven faster!)? What may be one's incentive to assist the unfavorable or depressing if heaven exists? Can a solid act performed out of outrage of hell or the promise of heaven be considered to be ethical? Is Christian morality quite solid and ethical? Is it ethical to tutor the different cheek and furnish no resistance to the evildoer? Is it ethical to not at all bypass any judgement on all people else? many human beings declare that there may be no technological expertise with out morality, yet enable's opposite the question. Can there be morality with out technological expertise? interior the absence of solid advice with regard to the international how can one understand what to alter to realize a needed ethical effect? as quickly as in the past medical doctors taken care of many illnesses with procedures we now understand to be risky out of honest theory they have been helping. have been their strikes ethical? might the strikes of somebody doing those remedies right this moment be ethical? Is the refusal of blood transfusion Jehova's Witnesses for non secular motives ethical interior the absence of empiric information in want of their faith? Is refusal to settle for the validity cutting-edge advancements in technological expertise, e.g. Darwin's theory, ethical? i think of it is greater advantageous than sufficient.

Answer 11

As a Humanist, I don't act morally because I fear hell or desire the comforts of heaven. I do so because reason tells me that the world works more smoothly when people cooperate and try to live in harmony. We're all in this together, and selfishness only leads to chaos, which can only result in unhappiness. I enjoy the benefits of civilization, so I support that civilization by doing my part to make it run smoothly.