Atheist: Are we offering to replace institutions which have limited value, with ----?

Question

---nothing more than a smug, and self-complacent attitude toward society?
Where are the Atheist organizations that can replace The Salvation Army, Boy's Town, the YW or YMCA, or the many other religious institutions and hospitals that address the many serious problems that confront our society?

Do we just continue to ridicule religion, and offer no limitations on, or consequences for an individual's behavior? Do we offer nothing to replace the altruistic services performed by those same institutions that brainwash our children?

If we are successful in destroying religion , have we helped or harmed society? Or, do we even care?
I'm a curious, and concerned atheist

The "long arm of the law" is not quite long enough to deal with every kind of anti-social behavior. Therefore, if people should lose that built-in moral corrective, ---what will replace it?

THE REVEREND SOLEIL;---I can't recall EVER having used that word before.
Do you just enjoy reading anything you write?

It's strange that my right to call myself an atheist is being questioned.
The honest questions that I have posed ,should have been asked and answered without being threatened or insulted by them.
I know what I think, but I'm not sure about what other atheists have thought about.

Self-complacent=satisfied with one's self.---No need to modify their beliefs or behavior.

THE REVEREND:---If you're applying for a job as a literary critic, perhaps you should go on to "Dick and Jane's Guide to Elementary English #2".

Perhaps atheists are not deliberately trying to destroy religion, but the number of atheists are increasing dramatically every year.
I only hope, we know what we're doing.
I have confidence in my own moral values, but it's becoming a bit scary to have faith that other atheists will be good guardians of all the things I hold dear.
When I read some of these answers that seem to ooze hatred for what they consider as ignorance, I'm not too sure about the company I'm keeping.
My old church told me to pity the ignorant, not to hate them or insult them.
I wonder if a godless society would REALLY be the humane place that we atheists claim it would be.
Most of the people I see in criminal courtrooms claim to be ethical and morally upright citizens, but I have trouble believing them.
As a thinking atheist, are you willing to believe that all of these people will " do the right things"?

Certainly, we don't need religion to be ethical,---but religion, ( in spite of it's own crimes ) , has worked pretty well in controlling much of the anti-social behavior in society for centuries.
What do we know about a godless society?

HOWIE R:---If people will do the right thing for the right reason, then why do we have laws,judges, police, and prisons?

History has proven that we often need incentives to do the right things.

MOREY 000:---My question concerns itself with the future welfare of our society, not just the future welfare of Morey 000.

006:---I agree with everything you have said; but how durable is this code of ethics? Does it require respect for something apart from the law to enforce it?

MARVINSUSS:---Good answer.
However I wish I could have that much confidence in the honesty, and efficiency of government to do all these great things.

Their track record comes up a little short of the mark.

Answer 1

Apparently, this was not such a silly question after all. Otherwise, why did so many atheists respond to it in such an ,obviously, agitated way.---The question seems to have hit a nerve.
Judging by the insulting tone of many of these answers, one would believe the poser of this question was begging to be admitted into this distinguished club of atheism.

It's very easy to say that "I would ALWAYS do the right thing", but we all know from experience, that what we say we'll do is not always what we actually will do.
I couldn't even count how many times I've heard people say "Don't treat me like a child. I know right from wrong." ; and then they go on talking and behaving like a rebellious child.---Most of us overestimate our level of moral maturity, when we are removed from the urgency of an emotional situation.

Answer 2

The answer to your very serious and important question was given by a very wise man with a quill pen and only one piece of parchment, so he could not waste his words. He thought about the way a good society ought to work and, without recourse to religion, wrote the following, every word of which is extremely important:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Please note that government (that filthy word again) can not only establish courts, police departments, and armies (schools came much later); it can also concern itself with "Welfare" (that other filthy word).

I doubt that citizens prefer being helped by a charity rather than by a government institution. More to the point, the problem is that the overwhelmingly religious voters do not believe that their taxes should be used to help their fellow citizens in distress. More exactly, they do not trust government to use their taxes wisely.

Instead, they elect men, like Ronald Reagan and others, who do not believe government can work, believe that the best way to get elected is to promise tax cuts, and, when elected, do everything that will make government fail. So, Reagan laid off SEC bank examiners to cut the budget and that gave us the S&L bank scandal.

Prudent use of taxes requires good, honest management, which requires good salaries, which the same citizens are not willing to pay with their taxes. That's the problem.

I have no cure for that problem, except to destroy religion and replace it with the Brotherhood of Man under the Motherhood of Nature.

(EDIT) If you do not believe government can be made to work, then you are the problem. Oh ye of little faith!

Who do we call on in case of war? The Salvation Army?

We often hear that rationing doesn't work. Let market forces do their work. Let private enterprise handle it. Let private charity do the work. Well, in WW II, FDR made rationing work for five years and we won that war.

All that is lacking is political will. Private enterprise has never worked when the problem is health or security or catastrophe. Even volunteer fire departments are government entity. You are the problem.

Answer 3

An interesting, and yet revealing question. Which is it, religious organizations are “altruistic” (your word) – having unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others OR they are “brainwashing our children.” I don’t believe they are both, I believe some are doing it for no return because of their beliefs, and I believe that some have less noble motives.

Yes an atheist may “deny the existence of god,” but have a very clear “religion” if they are honest with themselves. Oftentimes that religion tends to be self-serving, such as a “laissez-faire” whatever anybody does is OK, and really doesn’t affect anyone else, or even a hedonistic, pleasure-seeking individualism. Interestingly enough, if either of these is their religion, they don’t abide by it, because they don’t allow others to have their own religion or belief in god, but seek to “ridicule” and “destroy” religion. Why? Probably because of the threat to their own “religion.” When there is no accountability to an authority of any kind, then there are “no limitations on, or consequences for an individual’s behavior.” Also, sadly enough when you remove any authority or “god,” there is oftentimes no reason to solve the problems of society or care about others, that does not affect me as an individual! What reason is there to care? The nobility of mankind is oftentimes over-rated. Altruism is an outpouring of God, not man.

Answer 4

You're trolling. Nobody is calling for "no limitations on ... an individual's behavior." Atheists aren't anarchists.

There are plenty of secular charitable organizations, too. It doesn't take a religion to be charitable.

Nor do I want to destroy religion. If it brings people comfort, great. I just have a problem with the people who want to force their religion on *me.*

If people need the threat of punishment or promise of reward just to act right, then they're probably better off with a religion. But I think most of us have enough of a moral compass to not need some kind of external stimulus.

I can be good because *it's the right thing to do.* Can you? I don't believe in a personal god, yet I've never killed, raped, or assaulted anyone. I don't steal. I don't get drunk. I don't cheat on my taxes. Or my wife. I've never thrown a punch in my life. And I give to charity. All without thinking that I have a god looking over my shoulder.

Is it really that hard to imagine?

By the way, if you really wanna pull it off, the plural is "atheists."

You're welcome.

Oh, and would your post count as bearing false witness?

Answer 5

Okay... as far as I can tell... atheists are NOT an organized group with any type of agenda or desire to replace / remove the institutions already in place in society.

Just because "WE" do not believe in the same beliefs as an organization does not mean that everything that group / organization does is without merit and needs to be taken away.

And just because we don't have religion - it does not mean we are without morals... without humanity... and without compassion... and it does not make us sinful or "evil" people. (Remember, some of the worst attrocities committed against mankind were committed by highly religious people or in the name of their religion)

The ideas of "good" and "evil" in society are not based SOLELY upon religious teachings... I think people knew long before there was any type of organized religion that it was repugnant to un-necessarily kill other people... cannibalism was bad... and it's wrong to steal things from others (just as some examples).

We're not out to destroy religion.

We honestly don't care if other people decide to follow their "beliefs / faiths" ... it's not OUR place to think for them and tell them that their beliefs are wrong (although we disagree with them) -- it's only when we're dragged into these debates to "justify" our non-beliefs do we even bother to speak out about this at all.

Even though I don't believe in any religion -- I feel that your belief is YOURS -- and your relationship with your god / devine entity / flying spaghetti monster / etc ... should be a PERSONAL relationship ... and as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's relationship with THEIR god and their beliefs (or lack thereof)... everyone can be satisfied and happy.

Answer 6

Atheists don't ridicule religion, they just don't believe in the preaching and worship of entities.

These organizations you cite are both civil and religious, if your implication is that people only do good when they think they will be rewarded by a "god" then it is a sorry statement. Also, all these organization have had thier own immoral problems over the years.

And of course there is also all the horrible religious wars that have resulted in the killings of millions and millions of people but I guess thats ok as long as they give out soup to needy on weekends.

Lastly, Atheist don't want to destroy religion, they just don't want to be bothered by it.

Answer 7

THERE ARE NO atheist organizations that can replace The Salvation Army, Boy's Town, the YW or YMCA, or the many other religious institutions and hospitals that address the many serious problems that confront our society.

Atheists are nothing more than counterculture misfits who had an unfortunate up-bringing.

God Bless their souls.

Answer 8

As a Christian I can say that just because an organization is founded by Christians, Catholics or atheists doesn't make it's work necessarily good or bad at it's heart.

And I don't believe that atheists are necessarily trying to say that we shouldn't do good things for other human beings, whether through organizations or on a personal level.

What atheists ARE saying is that those people who founded such groups are misguided and apparently not intelligent enough to see what THEY say is obvious: that there is no God.

I say that without God, we wouldn't have the ability to feel such empathy for other humans that we go out of our way to help them.

Answer 9

Many of those mentioned institutions would continue, espcially as they have long lost their religious affiliations. I'm not overly in favor of a total destruction of religion, just a total reduction of its influence on the laws and education system.

There will continue to be charitable institutions even without religion. And as many have said, there are many atheist that contribute to various charities both with money and time.

Answer 10

These are noble institutions. I do not propose that we dispose of them. I only have a problem with religious people who try to infringe on the rights of others. I don't think you are really an atheist and I don't see myself as smug or self complacent. I see myself as speaking out for my freedoms.