What do atheists base their morality on?

Question

As Christians we are provided a code by which we are measured. We hold ourselves to the teachings of Jesus as well as the ten commandments. We fail, like all people do.
If atheists reject religion, on what do they base their moral code? If there were a universal moral code inherrent in men, I wouldn't need locks on my doors or a bank to hold my money. So, is each person free to come up with his/her own moral code? If so, what do they base it on? Their own individual experiences, education, and environment? What happens when one person's code conflicts with another's, in that case. If we were all atheist wouldn't this lead to anarchy?

Answer 1

Atheists are people who, whether they like it or not, have the law of God written on their hearts (Rom. 2:15). They are subject to the same laws of our country (and other countries) and they have a sense of right and wrong. They often work with people who are religious and have ethical standards as well as non-believers who are don't. So they are exposed to all sorts of moral behavior. In addition, they often form their own moral standards based on what suits them. Besides, robbery, lying, stealing, etc., can get you imprisoned, so it is practical and logical for an atheist to be ethical and work within the norms of social behavior. How ever you want to look at it, atheists, generally, are honest, hardworking people.

Nevertheless, some Christians raise the question, "What is to prevent an atheist from murdering and stealing? After all, they have no fear of God and no absolute moral code." The answer is simple: Atheists are capable of governing their own moral behavior and getting along in society the same as anyone else.

At the risk of labeling the atheist as self-centered, it does not serve the best interests of an atheist to murder and steal since it would not take long before he was imprisoned and/or killed for his actions. Basically, society will only put up with so much if it is to function smoothly. So, if an atheist wants to get along and have a nice life, murdering and stealing won't accomplish it. It makes sense for him to be honest, work hard, pay his bills, and get along with others. Basically, he has to adopt a set of ethics common to society in order to do that. Belief in God is not a requirement for ethical behavior or an enjoyable life.
On the other hand

Atheists' morals are not absolute. They do not have a set of moral laws from an absolute God by which right and wrong are judged. But, they do live in societies that have legal systems with a codified set of laws. This would be the closest thing to moral absolutes for atheists. However, since the legal system changes the morals in a society can still change and their morals along with it. At best, these codified morals are "temporary absolutes." In one century abortion is wrong. In another, it is right. So, if we ask if it is or isn't it right, the atheist can only tell us his opinion.

If there is a God, killing the unborn is wrong. If there is no God, then who cares? If it serves the best interest of society and the individual, then kill. This can be likened to something I call, "experimental ethics." In other words, whatever works best is right. Society experiments with ethical behavior to determine which set of rules works best for it. Hopefully, these experiments lead to better and better moral behavior. But, as we see by looking into society, this isn't the case: crime is on the rise.

There are potential dangers in this kind of self-established/experimental ethical system. If a totalitarian political system is instituted and a mandate is issued to kill all dissenters, or Christians, or mentally ill, what is to prevent the atheist from joining forces with the majority system and support the killings? It serves his self-interests, so why not? Morality becomes a standard of convenience, not absolutes.

But, to be fair, just because someone has an absolute ethical system based on the Bible, there is no guarantee that he will not also join forces in doing what is wrong. People are often very inconsistent. But the issue here is the basis of moral beliefs and how they affect behavior. That is why belief systems are so important and absolutes are so necessary. If morals are relative, then behavior will be too. That can be dangerous if everyone starts doing right in his own eyes. A boat adrift without an anchor will eventual crash into the rocks.

The Bible teaches love, patience, and seeking the welfare of others even when it might harm the Christian. In contrast, the atheists' presuppositions must be constantly changing, and subjective and does not demand love, patience, and the welfare of others. Instead, since the great majority of atheists are evolutionists, their morality, like evolution is the product of purely natural and random processes that become self serving.

Basically, the atheist cannot claim any moral absolutes at all. To an atheist, ethics must be variable and evolving. This could be good or bad. But, given human nature being what it is, I'll opt for the moral absolutes -- based on God's word -- and not on the subjective and changing morals that atheism offers.

Answer 2

No, you are wrong. Atheists gets thier moral code from what is happening in the world today. Are world is just going down, I hardly think one good thing that comes to mind. I am a student and everytime I study, I always question myself, what is goin to happen tomrrow. Atheists are right on thier part, in this world there are so many people, but not enough solutions. I am hindu, and no our scriptures dont teach this but, this is what I beleive about atheists. AND definatily no atheism does not lead to anarchy, and i bet most presidents don't even beleive in thier own religion. Take Pres. Bush for an example. I bet he does no know anything about Christianity or any other religion.

Answer 3

First of all, depending on the kind of Christian you are, your code could be completely different. Fred Phelps claims to be Christian and GAYS also claim to be Christian. So there are differences between sects.

Second of all, even within a sect, you don't follow everything in the Bible, you pick and choose what to believe. Some Catholics interpret that the Bible allows contraception, others do not. Some are very militant about keeping the Sabbath holy, others are not. Ecetera, ecetera.

Third, the parts of the 'code' you do have in common are things which are commong across nearly all religions and philosophies - don't murder, don't steal, don't lie etc; These basic principles have nothing to do with religion, they are just common sense rules for society to function. Any religion which did not have these rules would die out quickly.

Answer 4

Those born without the instinctual empathy for their fellow humans are Psychopaths & religion can only help them to hide their lack of emotions. Humans, being a pack or group animal, have a natural instinct to protect other members of their group & develop a moral code that protects both their offspring & other members of their group.
One should probably consider religion to be a political invention to control larger populations beyond the reach of the leaders. Humans, regardless of religion, or lack of such, have been known to instinctively sacrifice their lives to save or protect other members of their family or group.
Yes, in the final analysis, each human must decide their own path & a human will only follow a moral code that makes sense to them. When my code conflicts with yours, I follow my moral code... some can be induced to follow a moral code they disagree with, but only to avoid punishment or get a reward. That is why heaven & hell were invented by some religions.

Answer 5

Xianity does NOT have a monopoly on morals - there are more xians in gaols per capita than atheists.
This could be the result of two things only - Atheists are smarter than Theists and don't get caught OR Atheists are generally more moral than Theists.

Every society develops laws to maintain the security of its members otherwise there's no ‘society’.

I do unto others etc cos it's easier and I sleep better - I do the right thing cos it's the right thing to do NOT cos it's written in an old book along with a sadistic 'god' who kills for his pleasure.

If you used bible for your code of behaviour how come you don't do stoning of disrespectful children and keep slaves?

NOWHERE in bible does it say that rape or child molestation is bad - there's not even a commandment against either one BUT there is a commandment against coveting your neighbour's stuff - coveting is the basis of capitalism - are you against capitalism?
Are you a communist?
.

Answer 6

Common sense.

It has been my observation that Christians can't agree on a moral code even among themselves. There would be only a slightly fewer number of personal disputes in an all atheist society.

Anarchy? No, it would just lead to a saner public policy by the government.

Answer 7

now why do you think "If we were all atheist wouldn't this lead to anarchy?" that would happen?
SEPARATION of church and state at least here in the US

I'm atheists and i base my moral code on common sence but then again i barely here the little voice in the back of my head some times. some times moral code does not come into play ie: i'm starving "blank" has lots of money i rob him to feed my self. that is instinct ans survival

Answer 8

1. The inherent worth of every person. People are worthy of respect, support and caring simply because they are human.

2. Working towards a culture that is relatively free of discrimination on the basis of gender, race, etc.

3. The separation of church and state, and the freedom of speech

4. The system of truth in the field of morals and ethics.

AND

5. Freedom from church dogma and its stagnation of the mind.

Answer 9

It's ironic that this comes from a religious source, but "treat others as you would have them treat you".

People are smart enough to realise that they would like to live in a safe society and not have to worry about being hurt/stolen from etc. all the time.

As a result, people usually don't do it in return because otherwise it would be encouraging that kind of behaviour in the society they live in.

Also, people can sympathise with someone in pain because often they've been there themselves.

I don't think there has to be anything spiritual about it

Answer 10

Christianity bases their moral code on whether or not they want to burn in a fiery hell for all eternity....therefore - Fear. Yeah, that's definitely the way I want to live my life.

I base my morals on what I how I would want someone to treat me or my family or friends. That's how I treat others. I don't do it to avoid some invisible parent figure being angry with me and sending me to my room. I do it because I see that we are all people, we're all equal and we all deserve to be treated that way.

Seriously, I think you christians should really reevaluate why you have the morals you do. If you think that if you didn't have god in your life you could do anything you wanted, you should really think about what that means......

Answer 11

Morality does not require religion. Morality arises from the fact that we are social animals. Morals are a way of keeping the social infra-structure from collapsing.
Animals such as gorillas lack religion, yet live peacefully together in small tribes.