English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

(I figure if I misspell 'Atheists', I'll get more replies.)

Christians frequently posit that atheism's appeal lies in its lack of morality or ethics, that an atheist can do any fool thing he likes without consequence. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this is not the case.

What moral/ethical system do you use? How do you justify it? What is your basis for understanding what is good/bad?

2007-03-19 16:22:17 · 21 answers · asked by Doc Occam 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Let me apologise here for the cheap trick of sounding like another fundie yahoo in the question - looking at it from another's perspective, that makes me little better than a troll.

I am myself an atheist with my own well-developed (I think) ethics system; I wanted to get a sense of other people's ethical stances that don't rely on the Bible.

So, sorry, everyone, for a lousy way to phrase a genuine question.

2007-03-19 17:55:57 · update #1

21 answers

On the contrary -- christians are the ones that teach people they can do pretty much anything they want to, even horribly bad things, and as long as they accept jesus as their savior they'll be forgiven. That is how you teach to be not responsible...satan makes you do it if you do something bad, jesus will forgive you anway so it's ok. No personal responsibility.

Atheists, on the other hand, understand that there are consequences from actions. That there is no magic person in the sky to forgive every bad thing we do -- that we have to deal with the consequences of our actions here and now. We take responsibility for our actions, and don't blame bad actions on "tempation by satan" and don't think magic sky guy is going to forgive us.

Morality didn't ever, anywhere in human history, come from religion. Those who claim otherwise are ignorant. Morality comes from our evolved emotions, from our desire (and evolutionary advantage) to live in large groups of other humans, and to do so harmoniously. We understand that if we're bad to others, they're going to be bad to us...so we try not to be bad to others. Pretty darn simple, and no need for some god on high to dictate the rules.

Who is more moral: a person who has his own deeply felt sense of ethics, shared humanity, and sense of personal responsibility (atheists); or those who only do good because a mythical supernatural being promises to reward them if they do or punish them if they don't?

I'll take atheist morals anyday, thank you.

Peace.

2007-03-19 16:37:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Morality is based in the development of a sense of care.

And just for the record, the follower of a god based ethic is still doing whatever fool thing he wants, only he has settled for wanting to follow a system some other person made up.

2007-03-19 16:30:15 · answer #2 · answered by neil s 7 · 1 0

Our morals come from human intelligence, common sense, and the empathy that we all have for our fellow human beings.
"Atheism's appeal lies in its lack of morality or ethics..." etc. etc. is what some Christians like to tell each other, so that they can then pat themselves on the back and feel all superior. Of course, like pretty much every single thing they say about atheists, it has NO basis in fact, whatsoever. They just completely made it up.

2007-03-19 16:33:13 · answer #3 · answered by Jess H 7 · 2 0

STATISTICAL evidence suggests that this is not the case. We see FEWER atheists in jail than you would expect from the general population.

What's my basis for morality? Simple. If it hurts someone, it's wrong. Stealling, killing, some lies, those are wrong. Was that really so hard?

Actually, I find it a lot scarier that people get their morals from some 'god' or book. You really have to think about it if you want to practice it. A lot of it doesn't make much sense if you think about it. And it lets a lot of people think that they can break the laws of the country, because their god said it was ok.

2007-03-19 16:29:11 · answer #4 · answered by eri 7 · 2 0

Good and bad are point of views. Although I feel my actions are "good", I don't hold "good" and "bad" are moral standards. Everything that one does is both beneficial and detrimental at the same time. I may buy a loaf of bread for a poor family, but that loaf was made by growing and then killing yeast; it was likely delivered to the store in a truck that consumed fossil fuel that polluted the atmosphere; it was packaged in plastic, also from fossil fuel, that when discarded will be garbage polluting the Earth. Here's a more basic example: every breath we take adds a few seconds to our life, but also takes us one breath closer to our last.Something good is something we perceived as more beneficial than detrimental; and visa versa for something that is bad. So, from this, how does one presume a moral code? "Experience" is often sited. However, since everything is relative to one's prespective, how is society supposed to trust each individual's experience to steer them towards activities which it feels are more beneficial than detrimental?Once we answer that, then we can toss out religion. Any takers?
For me, my morality is based on my experiences. I do try to have all of my actions within what is preceived as being "good" (more beneficial than detrimental). Is there any way for society to codify this? Yes, through secular law. Of course, then one can get into the duscussion about fairness of certain laws, but that's another topic all together.

2007-03-19 16:28:31 · answer #5 · answered by Pint 4 · 3 0

Our morals come from principles like the Golden Rule and social contract theory. These are far better moral systems than religion, since religions generally use a system of specific rules which can quickly become outdated. And if someone only follows those rules to get to heaven or avoid hell, then they don't have morals.

2007-03-19 16:26:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

I'm not an Atheist but,

Biological pshycologists believe that moral codes and ethics occur naturally to help ensure survival of the species.

2007-03-19 16:37:33 · answer #7 · answered by hazydaze 5 · 1 0

Well, many Christians forget that there were morals and ethics before them, just not necessarily the same. Look at the Code of Hammurabi (ca. 1760 BC), the codex of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin (ca. 1870 BC), the Codex of Eshnunna (ca. 1930 BC), and the codex of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur (ca. 2050 BC). So really, Christians did not invent rules, laws, morals, ethics, and what-have you. The early Christians merely added, subtracted, altered, etc just like they did with most of Pagan history so as to convert them to the Christian following.

2007-03-19 16:36:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anuolf 3 · 3 0

just because someone thinks gods is a myth doesn't not mean they are not moral people, typical christian I am better than yo because I believe thinking. I am Atheists and have morals etc because I know what is right and wrong, I like to treat people how I like to be treated, I follow laws.

2007-03-19 16:28:40 · answer #9 · answered by Jason Bourne 5 · 3 0

Laws, common decency, upbringing, belief, conscience, convention, ethic, goodness, honesty, honor, integrity, moral code, morality, natural law, principles, standards etc.

Will yours instantly crumble to dust if/when you realize there is absolutely *no* supernatural? Are they truly *that* fragile?

2007-03-19 16:28:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers