Atheists: would you please answer honestly, with an open mind?

Question

Do you believe that certian things are immoral for anyone to do at any time, in any place, under any circumstances?

If so, does that mean that there is a higher morality?

If so, who or what created the higher morality?

(I think that the answer to the last question is God)

Answer 1

Agnostic here:

Yes, I do believe that there are things which are immoral for anyone to do at any time.

These things arise from social mores that are created by many forces: If religion exists in a given society, then religion is part of it, but so too are sociology, history, biology, chemistry - anything that influences how a society is created and how it acts.

Natural law can exist completely absent religion, and can dictate and govern societies. It's at the core of any legal realist society and serves as the crux of any dictum of morality that a society makes.

Your argument already assumes that you know the answer is God, and is logically falsely caused.

Answer 2

Morality is based on acceptance of the mores of a particular culture. No culture can develop without some governing rules and in human terms some are held almost universally such as not killing. However, the injunction against killing can be differently qualified by each culture as some cultures can accept killing of some classes or sets of outsiders to the culture.
Buddhism does not have the concept of moral but uses a concept of whether an action is wholesome. That is it promotes good mental and physical health and well being. Any action is wholesome provided that the consequences are not negative in any sense.
I don't think that a higher morality in the sense which you mean does exist as a law of nature created by anything other than man but I do believe that there is a general collection of actions which will produce the minimum of negative effects on society.

Answer 3

This may come as a surprise to you , But morality is an independent function from religion . You don't need God to be a moral person and a belief in a god doesn't make you a moral person.
If you give it a moments thought you may realize that an atheist with high moral standards is actually morally superior to a Christian with similar standards.
The reason that statement can be considered true is that the atheist acts without any expectactions of being rewarded for his actions. The Christian on the other hand can be motivated by the reward of everlasting life. That's a really large incentive .
So who is the more moral person ?

Answer 4

I think of myself more of an agnostic than an atheist, but close enough.

No, I think that people have always decided the meaning of moral and immoral, and that has changed over time. And if you say, "Well, then you are saying it's ok to rape and murder and steal and etc?" Then I'd say if we think that these things are bad then they are bad for us. But if you look at history and at other places in the world even today, you will see what we think of as moral and immoral is different than in other times and places.

That applies to Christian civilizations of the past as well. Christian countries were ok with slavery, ritualized honor killings, warring kings, torture, killing infidels, absolute oppression of people by rich nobles, keeping themselves wealthy and keeping others impoverished. Democracy was opposed, women had few rights, blacks and other minorities were pronounced to be subhumans. Sure, there were some Christians who thought differently, but enough of the majority of the people and enough of the powerful people who actually ran the government and the church government agreed with these ideas that we today find totally immoral.

Answer 5

Knowing that certain things are immoral under any circumstance does not require a higher morality, just the ability to determine right from wrong. People are capable of doing that on their own.

Answer 6

Yes I do believe there immoral things, example Killing, molesting, intentionally physically or emotionally hurting people ect.

A higher morality would be the people who raised me, and society and laws in general. Not to mention this thing most of us possess called a conscience.

My mother and family and state officials created those higher moralities, not a phigment of my imagination aka God.

Answer 7

I believe that people whould live and let live, respecting other peoples beliefs and cultures. You do not need to believe in a higher morality to know if something is good or not.

Its like christians are only charitable and good to people because they think they'll get into heaven for it. If there was no heaven, but still a god would they be nice? Do they really care about the people they're 'helping', or are they just worried about going to hell?

Answer 8

Morals are flexible, not everyone holds the same morals, however there is a majority that holds the same morality, and therefore that becomes the law of morality.

Certain things are bad for society (say, the killing of children), therefore they are considered "bad". Other things are good for society (such as honesty) so they are considered "good".

However does that mean we should do whatever we want? No, we should do what is good for humanity. It is a biological imperritive.

Answer 9

Morality changes with the times, which indicates that it is dictated by man and not some higher power. 200 years ago, many Christians kept slaves, now that is unacceptable, it is morally wrong. 1700 years ago, it was fun to throw the Christians to the lions, but now it would be considered immoral (but still fun). Times change.

Answer 10

I think that humans do think in the terms of the golden rule, before it was ever said or written down. Obviously, most of us wouldn't enjoy being lied to, being murdered, being raped, being stolen from, etc. But I don't accept this as proof of a "higher morality".

At some point, when civilization started to develop, humans realized that certain things would help society as a whole while other things would hinder it. For example, its not beneficial to society as a whole if its members going around killing each other for fun. Its not beneficial to society for its members to randomly take from each other.

Its basically common sense. Some things promote the greater good, other things don't. Its as simple as that.