So, do you honestly think that the belief in No God makes someone morally bankrupt?

Question

(inspired by a previous answer)

Answer 1

Not at all. In fact, of the people I have met, I would say a larger percent of the "good" people were non-religious. I have seen some god believers do some pretty awful things. Often in the name of that god.

Answer 2

Not at all.

In fact, I'd say that one with no belief in God makes one more honest in terms of morality.

To use a more mundane analogy, let's say there is a drunken reveler passed out in the park. He has nice clothes and nice shoes, and his wallet is on the ground next to him. Which of the following people is more moral:

1. The man who shows up alone and puts the wallet back in the man's pocket because it's the right thing to do.
2. The man who sees a policeman nearby and puts the wallet back in the man's pocket because he doesn't want the policeman to catch him stealing.

Clearly man #1 is the more moral person. Yet, those people who claim that atheists are morally bankrupt are essentially calling man #1 the less moral person.

Before the Ten Commandments and before Jesus, people knew that murder and theft were wrong. Religion does not teach a person morality. A person is either moral or not. If he's not moral and is an atheist, then his immorality is pretty clear, since he has no fear of the afterlife. If he's not moral and a Christian, then his immorality is not clear, as he hides behind his religion and acts out of fear instead of kindness.

Edit: I find it telling when people like Mahal claim, "believing that there is no God ultimately leads to being morally bankrupt." It is pretty obvious that people like Mahal are moral only because they rely on a higher being rather than their own inclinations. It makes one wonder what their inclinations would be if they did not believe in God. The fact that they feel every godless person would be morally bankrupt reveals that Mahal and others are indeed morally bankrupt and are held back only by their belief in God.

Answer 3

That's the real question, isn't it? Moral according to whose's standards? If you try to please everyone, you will go crazy, and you will get exploited. If you please only yourself, that is easy, but ultimately selfish. Who gets to decide if your actions are moral or not? You cannot judge yourself, because you are a biased observer. You will almost always take your own side, but other people who know you might not agree that your actions were really all that moral (and they don't know your motives, so their information is incomplete).

Everyone is "moral" and "good" according to their own self serving standards. Even Al Capone and Adolph Hitler thought that they were good people, since they thought that they were simply giving the public what it wanted. Without an objective standard, then how would you even know if you were morally bankrupt or not?

===edit==

In other words, it is easy to take whatever it is that you are already doing anyway, and declare your actions to be "moral" according to your own rationalization.

And don't tell me that atheists always do good for its own sake. Most people do good, irregardless of their religious beliefs, because they are trying to be liked and admired -- either by their own self, or others.

Answer 4

No. Morality comes from cultural views, genetic makeup, society, and other factors that make up a person's personality.
Religion is an aid for some people to channel their sense of morality in a structured sense. Others (such as atheists) do not feel that this aid is necessary.

Answer 5

On the contrary, every study ever done on the subject reveals that agnositcs and atheists are typically the most moral group around. Despite being 10-14% of the US population, they only occupy 0.209% of the prison population.

Also Atheists and secular nations have by far the lowest rates of crime, rape, murder, abortion, stds, divorce, intolerance, prejudice, and so on whereas christians are among the highest. Despite christian smear campaigns, reality clearly indicates that non-believers are the most moral of all groups.

Indeed all the evidence points to atheists being upstanding and moral people while it's the religious tending to be more violent, criminal, and causing social problems. Atheist std rates are lower by as much as 300x, and they have the lowest divorce rates (at 21%) while protestants and born again christians have the highest. And so on.

Answer 6

No, of course not. Some of the best people I've ever known in my life are atheists, agnostics or nonreligious people.

On another note, someone who ONLY does the right thing because they think they're going to get a reward for it someday isn't someone that I would call "moral" to begin with...

Answer 7

No, if someone is moral because it is the right thing to do is likely more moral and pure in heart than someone who does good just for the celestial payoff in heaven/ One is giving looking for nothing in return the other is looking for payback.

Answer 8

Everyone has a morality. Some people get it from their home, community, or friends. But everyone knows what is right and wrong as their group sees it. Terrorists are convinced that their personal sacrifice will take them straight to their heaven. It is not my morality, but it is theirs!

Answer 9

From a human perspective, no. I know plenty of people that try to live a morally sound life, but they're not necessarrily religious, or Christian.

Answer 10

First of all> LOVE the cat, so cute

This is Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development as taught in psychology, and pasted here from http://allpsych.com/psychology101/moral_development.html

"Although it has been questioned as to whether it applied equally to different genders and different cultures, Kohlberg’s (1973) stages of moral development is the most widely cited. It breaks our development of morality into three levels, each of which is divided further into two stages:

Preconventional Level (up to age nine):

~Self Focused Morality~

1. Morality is defined as obeying rules and avoiding negative consequences. Children in this stage see rules set, typically by parents, as defining moral law.

2. That which satisfies the child’s needs is seen as good and moral.

Conventional Level (age nine to adolescence):

~Other Focused Morality~

3. Children begin to understand what is expected of them by their parents, teacher, etc. Morality is seen as achieving these expectations.

4. Fulfilling obligations as well as following expectations are seen as moral law for children in this stage.

Postconventional Level (adulthood):

~Higher Focused Morality~

5. As adults, we begin to understand that people have different opinions about morality and that rules and laws vary from group to group and culture to culture. Morality is seen as upholding the values of your group or culture.



6. Understanding your own personal beliefs allow adults to judge themselves and others based upon higher levels of morality. In this stage what is right and wrong is based upon the circumstances surrounding an action. Basics of morality are the foundation with independent thought playing an important role."

Based on this, many religious people are in the three year old stage. "Please don't send me to hell! I'll do whatever you want even if it makes no sense!!"