Is morality dependent on religion?

[Left]

Nay. Samurai had a moral code.

But Bushido had a strong foundation in Shinto and Buddhism.

 

[Sidhe]

Good point.
But how can you be sure these animals don't have a religion ?

You'd need to understand what a religion is to answer that question, and sadly I have to produce a definition:

re·li·gion Audio pronunciation of "religion" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.

1.
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.


Idiom:
get religion Informal

1. To become religious or devout.
2. To resolve to end one's immoral behavior.

Sadly animals can't convey proseletysing of a religion amongst the group, but it does not stop them from being moral.

 

[Sidhe]

So, by MB's logic, if you took 2 or 20 or 200 infant humans, stuck them on an island with no religious influence, these people would not have any morals.

Uh, BS. And before you ask me to prove it, sigh, you prove otherwise, because your'e the one making the outrageous claims.

He can't prove his claim, so to prove otherwise is irelevant surely.


I agree, it's outrageous.

 

[pboily]

I am not sure if this point has been made already, but if there were no morals before religion and morality can only evolve from religion (pardon the pun), how exactly did we get religion in the first place?

Wouldn't the religion's founder have to have some morals in order to codify them and teach his followers? But he or she wasn't born religious and so he must have had the morals before religion.

Possibly, that person got morals from religious osmosis (being raised in a culture with an already existing religion (and so a culture with morals)), but that cannot explain the rise of the first religion.

 

[Corlindale]

how exactly did we get religion in the first place?

I think most religious people would argue that God gave it to us. But that is only a valid argument if one believes in God.

 

[pboily]

And so the stalemate continues.

What I find frustrating is that all the debates are just thinly veiled arguments either in favor or against the existence of an supreme being. Whether one believes in the existence or the non-existence of such a being, we argue and argue and reason and feel, but at the end of the day, our conclusions are just re-statements of our hypotheses.

 

[Sidhe]

It is a stalemate, but why on God's or non God's Earth someone trys to argue that they are right is beyond me.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

, how exactly did we get religion in the first place?

Futile attempt to explain existence born from primates' curiousity and human intellect.

 

[VoodooAce]

I think most religious people would argue that God gave it to us. But that is only a valid argument if one believes in God.

Well, people on one side of the debate have been asked to provide proof for their side, so I would then ask anyone that believes this to prove it. When they prove their case, I'll prove mine.

 

[pboily]

It is a stalemate, but why on God's or non God's Earth someone trys to argue that they are right is beyond me.

If they can convince someone else that their own views are right, I imagine that it makes it more credible to them? Or something like that.

 

[pboily]

Futile attempt to explain existence born from primates' curiousity and human intellect.

Not if morals don't exist without religion...

 

[shadow2k]

Heh, I remember this one. For those of you that missed it, here's Dictionary.com's definition of Atheism:

a·the·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-zm)
n.

Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
The doctrine that there is no God or gods.
Godlessness; immorality.

Mob, with the alleged evidence you're trying to use to prove your point, I could just as easily say that religion only came about because of morality.

If you believe that people cannot decide what is right from wrong (regardless of whether they make the correct choices or not) without having to worship something they'll never come to know, then I truly feel for you.

The bible tells us that God's animals were given to us as food...well, after the whole debacle with that silly serpent in the garden. Apparently a perfect being without sin should be a vegetarian. But we are all sinners because of Adam and Eve, and God said we could now eat whatever the hell we wanted basically. Well, not really, there were still some rules about that, until Jesus said that mixing certain things was ok. So why don't we eat our dogs? Why don't I hack up my Akita instead of running down to the supermarket for a side of beef? He's got a lot of meat on him. I bet he tastes like chicken. I wonder what that stray cat on my front porch tastes like. Let me check my bible real quick and see what it says...or maybe, without the help of God, I already know that I shouldn't do that.

Society dictates most of our morals. Religion may play a part in influencing them, whether you're religious or not, but that's a far cry from being the only source.

 

[MobBoss]

So, by MB's logic, if you took 2 or 20 or 200 infant humans, stuck them on an island with no religious influence, these people would not have any morals.

Uh, BS. And before you ask me to prove it, sigh, you prove otherwise, because your'e the one making the outrageous claims.

If you took 2 or 20 or 200 infants and left them on an island to themselves without religion I daresay you would end up with a Lord of the Flies situation to the extreme.

But you are free to disagree with that all you want.

 

[pboily]

If you believe that people cannot decide what is right from wrong (regardless of whether they make the correct choices or not)...

Who knew old God was a Democrat...

 

[GenMarshall]

I feel that morality is dependent on religion.

 

[shadow2k]

If you took 2 or 20 or 200 infants and left them on an island to themselves without religion I daresay you would end up with a Lord of the Flies situation to the extreme.

But you are free to disagree with that all you want.

They'd have morals. They'd just be based on a different set of standards.

 

[VoodooAce]

If you took 2 or 20 or 200 infants and left them on an island to themselves without religion I daresay you would end up with a Lord of the Flies situation to the extreme.

I'm sure it would. They'd still be the human animal, after all. They would revert to instinct, for sure, as that's all they would have. Its a no brainer.

They would almost certainly form up into however many 'groups', but within each group would exist some set of morals....or they wouldn't survive as a group. Who knows, it is possible that they would form religion at the same time...they would, eventually, that's for sure. Regardless, I think it only makes sense to say that their 'religion' would evolve around their set of morals.

But you are free to disagree with that all you want.

I know. So are you.

 

[Kozmos]

But Bushido had a strong foundation in Shinto and Buddhism.

I wouldnt call them religions....more like self-improvement.

 

[Boris Godunov]

I think morality would probably be much better if it weren't for religion. Religion tends to breed hypocrites more than great moral men.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

I feel that morality is dependent on religion.

Of course you have a right to your opinion, but the discussions are more instructive if you also add why you hold your belief.

If morality is dependent upon religion as you claim, then are those of us who are not religious incapable of being and/or acting moral?