Is an ethical Atheist really better than an immoral Believer?

Question

I'm going to get bashed because of this, but i say no, although that believer gives faith a bad name, and is going the opposite way of his teachings, He still acknowledges the being which created him.

The point to this question is: If religion was applied correctly, we wouldn't have immoral believers, don't you think so?
---------------------------
Disclaimer (Oh you know i'm gonna need it!): This question is in no way meant to offend any faith, creed or belief (Or lack of) , just a peaceful expression of opinion and request for yours, I am in no way resposible for my opinions and take no responsibility for them.
------------------------

Salahuldin: Don't you mean repent BEFORE the day of Judgement? (Before death)

People don't get this the wrong way, but Blasphemy is the worst possible thing you can do as a human, but i guess that doesn't mean anything to an atheist.

The great gazoo:
according to statistics only 6% or the US are atheists, and many of them have a high standard of living, get a good income.

EDIT::::: I was going to write this in the original question, but didn't think you would over look it.

If a believer commits a crime ,i.e. killing babies, that person ACCORDING TO THE TEACHINGS should be punished.

Answer 1

It depends on how immoral the believer, surely, unless you're saying that using the gift of free will to not believe is worse than any other moral act including incest, rape, murder, bestiality and genocide?

Answer 2

Ah my young apprentice, I see you have mastered the lesson of the disclaimer. You shall go far - lo and maybe even all the way to level 4...

But as to your question...

No, an ethical anyone is "better" than an immoral anyone - but thank you for acknowledging we baby eaters might aspire to some level of morality.

As to the second part, I dare say you are right in saying that if religion was applied correctly there would be only moral believers. However, do you see this ever happening? Realistically, honestly, there will always be people who are morally and/or psychologically/neurologically challenged, who are unable to work within societally acceptable parameters of "right" behaviour. Then there's the just plain greedy, selfish ones who will trample over their grandmothers' best china (not to mention their grandmothers) to get whatever they want.

Meanwhile, why not take each person on their merits - as I suspect you actually do?

Answer 3

You ask the question as if the believer's faith in NOTHING is justified.

Your opinion is biased because you are a believer, and you feel anyone who is a believer is better simply because they "acknowledge the being which created" them.

I don't know about you, but the beings that created me were my mother & father. I acknowledge that. How does believing in an imaginary figure make you better than anyone else?

Believing in something like a "god" & being immoral does not make a person better than someone that doesn't believe in god. ESPECIALLY if the person who doesn't believe is an ethical and moral person.

Answer 4

Blasphemy isnt the worst thing you could do as a human.

And yes an ethical atheist is better than an immoral believer.

because a believer is not a believer if he or she is immoral.

theres a similar creed in thought:

Id prefer to have smart enemies than stupid friends.

Amen to that.

Answer 5

This is one of the problems people have with religion.

I, as an atheist, can live my life as an unbeliever while doing the best I can for society and harming no one. Yet I get damned to hell at every turn simply because I will not profess a loyalty and belief to an imaginary being.

Absolutely horrible people who profess a belief get a free ticket to this place called heaven simply because they believe. It doesn't matter if you rape, murder, or molest young children, you get to go simply for believing.

How does that make any sense?

***I'm loving Fluffy's added details.

Answer 6

No.
"Ethical atheist' what mean ethical for you?.. for me mean to keep the moral laws, the moral laws are the 10 rules of God and the rule of love from the New Testament.
'Immoral believer' what mean for you?... for me mean if is immoral he can't be believer to, if he says so, he lies.
So "Ethical atheist' and 'Immoral believer' are words which mean +and - =0.......- and + = 0

Answer 7

Your opinion reflects only that you value faith more than you value morality. Now, which one of these would you rather live with? I think if the reality of this opinion came home to roost, you would find it difficult to maintain your present position.

Also, despite your disclaimer, you are necessarily responsible for your own opinion. Since you are the origin of your own opinion, you must be responsible for it. Your opinion cannot be someone else's fault.

Answer 8

"although that believer gives faith a bad name, and is going the opposite way of his teachings, He still acknowledges the being which created him."

a- he acknowledges the being he THINKS created him. God wasn't a proven fact last time I looked
b- and as long as he does that, he can go around killing, say, babies and still be better than a godless man who behaves correctly?

I don't think so.

Answer 9

So how come so few atheists wind up in prison. We are only about 0.2% of the prison population and around 10% of the general population. So that makes us 50X less likely to end up there.

What you are saying is that Hitler (a Catholic) is better than Carl Sagan just because he believes in God? That is silly. I see how you could wind up thinking that plants were here before the Sun with that kind of warped outlook.

Answer 10

Yes.
An ethical person is always better than an immoral one regardless of faith. To say otherwise is just stupid.
"I'm sorry I hacked off that poor woman's head Judge but I am a Christian so go lightly on me" sounds a bit ridiculous to me.