Is morality dependent on religion?

[civ2]

Marital morals stem from the fact that reproduction for humans is not the end in itself but rather a way to bring forth CHILDREN - the new human individuals.
Animals don't overindulge in these since their nature even prevents this.
On the contrary, humans can an often do overindulge in sex which leads to lots of different problems - starting with the fact that a healthy (morally) family consists of man, woman AND children.
"Sleeping everybody with everybody" prevents children from true love to both their parents (I wonder who from those 100 was my father?) and also to their future mates.
Respect in family is the key to a healthy family.
You'll undestand this when you marry - either in positive or negative way.
Only respectful pair can live truly happily.

 

[Truronian]

Marital morals stem from the fact that reproduction for humans is not the end in itself but rather a way to bring forth CHILDREN - the new human individuals.
Animals don't overindulge in these since their nature even prevents this.
On the contrary, humans can an often do overindulge in sex which leads to lots of different problems - starting with the fact that a healthy (morally) family consists of man, woman AND children.
"Sleeping everybody with everybody" prevents children from true love to both their parents (I wonder who from those 100 was my father?) and also to their future mates.
Respect in family is the key to a healthy family.
You'll undestand this when you marry - either in positive or negative way.
Only respectful pair can live truly happily.

Personally I see limitting marriage to a fertile couple of different sex is immoral.

 

[civ2]

Truronian
The idea is not about fertile couple - it's about respect.
The first "targets" to be respected should be parents - and only a moral family provides such choice.
Adopted children get exactly the same situation.

 

[Truronian]

Truronian
The idea is not about fertile couple - it's about respect.
The first "targets" to be respected should be parents - and only a moral family provides such choice.
Adopted children get exactly the same situation.

And in what way is religion a precursor to this? This seems to be just a case of listen to the people that are teaching you how to survive (aka respect).

 

[Sahkuhnder]

Logic doesn't provide morals.

Logic can provide morals if used properly, I use logic to provide my morals. It's just a tool to help us think clearer.

--------

Simple eample is a small child - he's usually way too selfish and must be taught to share and wait while others can have this thing.
But any child has logic and this very logic makes him selfish - "why should I share? It's MINE!"

Your example shows a small child acting selfishly. Acting selfishly is rarely logical and a small child can't really be expected to understand and apply the rules of logic to the creation of a morality.

If you claim it can't be done, use me as your example if you like rather than a small child.

--------

If logic would prevent people from crimes - there would be no crimes.

I could make the same untrue statement in reverse if it will help you to see the flaw in your reasoning. "If religious morality would prevent people from crimes - there would be no crimes." People with religious-based morals commit crimes also. There is no relationship between the source of our morality and whether we choose to follow it. Even religions admit we are all sinners. To expect anyone, of any moral basis, to act perfectly at all times is unrealistic.

--------

Do you say that 99% of people are stupid and without logic???
Usually the worse criminals are also of the cleverest people - but they have no moral that would prevent them from misusing their gift.

I don't know if your question was addressed to me but I'll have a go at answering it. 99% of people are not stupid or without logic, and as I mentioned above criminals come from religious-morality and non-religious morality backgrounds and lifestyles. This variable only clouds the OP question, "Is morality dependent on religion?"

--------

It's simple - if you have nobody to fear (and you can always bribe a cop or a judge since they are also immoral) - then you have nothing to stop you from crimes.

Are you really telling me the only reason I act moral is out of fear? I can't act moral based on love, good feelings, wishing to fit in and belong with my fellow man, etc. Why would I need to fear anyone? Fear is a religion-based scare tactic that I don't subscribe to.

--------

The key point that makes religion a good source for moral is the concept of "everything you do is seen on High".
I'm not speaking about the "people of religion" who are still people and might err (even a lot).
I'm speaking about the religion itself - the idea of being observed by God constantly.
This gives you the REASON to act morally.
An example which isn't very on-topic but can shed some light on the idea:
Once a Rabbi was put in jale by anti-semits.
One of the interrogators threatened him with a gun.
"Be quiet or I'll use this "toy" on you!"
The Rabbi answered:
"This "toy" can threaten a man who has many gods and one world but not a Jew like me who has One God and two worlds."

If being religious gives you your "REASON" to act morally, fine. Being religious doesn't give me my reason, yet somehow I still manage to act morally.

--------

So you can see that whenever a person "thinks for himself (selfishly)" he can "logically" assume that even killing is "moral" if HE is not the victim.

Once again you just seem to assume that the only form of thinking I can do for myself is selfish. Your premise is flawed. As I agree with you, based on logic, that needless killing is wrong, this shows that logic can be used to form a non-selfish, non-religion based morality system.

Are you really trying to tell me that because I'm not religious like you are that therefore I must somehow be immoral and selfish?

--------

Logic isn't the source of moral - it's the source of destruction of moral.

Sorry, but that statement is illogical. Logic is not the source of either inherently moral or inherently immoral but is just a set of tools useful to help clarify the thought process for those of us wise enough to do our thinking for ourselves. You use logic sometimes, are you destroying your own 'source of moral'? Is logic to be feared?

 

[QuoVadisNation]

I'm not going to read 12 pages of probably mostly intelligent responses. I just want to say that it seems to me that morality is defined more by cultural and social boundaries. Religion just sometimes enforce those boundaries (the best example I can give is the traditional outlook in Hinduism.)

So., I would say religion is more dependent on morality than the other way around.

 

[ComradeDavo]

To use a classic example....

Catholics think athiests are immoral for allowing abortions.
Athiets think Catholics are immoral for trying to force their views on them by trying to make abortion illegal.

Which one is 'in the right' is obviously a matter of personal opinion.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Am I the only religious person who thinks that morality can exist independent of religion here? I mean, I can understand morality, and know what I should do, without religion. But religion helps me to actually do it when it seems not to be in my best interest. (Not in a "I don't want to go to hell" sense or even a "I want to go to heaven" sense, but because I want to reflect God's love.)

Another thing; atheists and believers, good people and bad, often act illogically. I would almost go so far as to say that irrationality is more normal.

 

[Archbob]

Marital morals stem from the fact that reproduction for humans is not the end in itself but rather a way to bring forth CHILDREN - the new human individuals.
Animals don't overindulge in these since their nature even prevents this.
On the contrary, humans can an often do overindulge in sex which leads to lots of different problems - starting with the fact that a healthy (morally) family consists of man, woman AND children.
"Sleeping everybody with everybody" prevents children from true love to both their parents (I wonder who from those 100 was my father?) and also to their future mates.
Respect in family is the key to a healthy family.
You'll undestand this when you marry - either in positive or negative way.
Only respectful pair can live truly happily.

Why do you think we have a guilt complex about sex that society develops? Because everyone sleeping with everyone else leads to conflict and war and that endangers the survival of our species not to mention it leads to illigitment children and other unwanted things. Society simply makes rules to avoid the unwanted. There are many species who do overindulge, but species do things based on whats best for its survival and passing on its genes. Humans are no different.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Am I the only religious person who thinks that morality can exist independent of religion here?

No you are not.

 

[Maniacal]

I'm a practicing Atheist/Agnostic/Bujuist/Armagan+Ipekist/andsomethingelseist and am not religious but I do have morals and a concience.

 

[civ2]

I think I understood my mistake.
I tried to prove that "good moral" "must" be based on All-Knowing God - the source for BOTH fear and love btw.
The poll question is whether ANY moral stem from religion - answer to THAT question is definitely NO.
Moral itself is a set of rules of behaviour made and applied by someone.
Everybody has his own moral - the question is whether that "moral" is really MORAL.
That's why I think that "religion" is the source of an unarbitrary moral based on being watched by God "Who is Good" - and thus also "doing good".
Actually this very idea requires logic to be comprehended - but as I said you can't expect your one-person-logic-based moral to be objective.
And I do think that you often mix pure logic and your view based on experience.
But experience comes from everywhere.
And so on and so forth.
I really got tired...

 

[Azash]

Absolutely not. To religious people: You are not special in any way, nor do you hold the "moral high ground".

 

[civ2]

Azash
I never spoke about PEOPLE (religious or not) - I spoke about the idea and the source itself which is independant of its "followers".

 

[Azash]

I said that because, inevitably, somebody's going to start exclaiming how heathens cannot comprehend morality.

 

[Archbob]

No, neither good or bad moral must come from an all-powerful God. This is made plain by the fact that Aetheists that no longer believe in this all-powerful God have good morals. Religion is not required or neccessary for morality. However, once you adopt a religion, it doesn tend to dictate alot of your morality.

And no, I am deeply Protestant Christian and I do not believe religion in the source of morality.

The source of morality ultimately stems from the need for an intelligent species to survive not from religion.

A law is written in stone, after a few generations it just becomes "wrong" for someone to break that law. Thats how morals come about.

 

[Perfection]

Regarding logic, morals and religon.

Logic alone cannot form morals, but it can aid in thier process. You can't prove something is univerally good or bad. You can only ask if it's good or bad from your persective. Morality is relative to the observer.

Morals need not come from religion either.

I obtained my moral system by analyzing my emotions toward things to figure out what I wanted in life, and then used logic to help me obtain it.

 

[JoeM]

Isn't this a debate between moral absolutes and moral relativism?

My standpoint is that without Faith, there are no moral absolutes.

 

[civ2]

And basically without moral absolutes there are no moral at all - since egoism is not a form of moral but a result of a lack of one.

 

[Atlas14]

Im a Deist and I voted no that you don't need religion to have a moral code. This is a poor question in that it is clearly obvious that non-religious peoples can set their own moral standards and that morality is all relative, so although religious people may claim to have a true moral code, to another person it may be immoral and corrupt to follow. Religion might in many cases help a person to adhere to their moral standards or morality due to the pressure to please God and everyone else, but in no way is it necessary to be religious in order to have morality.