Is morality dependent on religion?

[GenMarshall]

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?

I feel that people who are not religious are incapable of being moral and acting moral. Mainly what I have seen. Here are some examples that I have noticed. Many atheists and non-religious people tend to support anything that is unChristian such as abortions, same-gender marrages, and euthenasia. Non religious people and atheist also practace immoral acts such as sex before marrage, using artifical birth control. This is just what I see from my eyes. I know that my words dont weigh heavely in an atheist majority forum, but these are just my opinions.

 

[Perfection]

I feel that people who are not religious are incapable of being moral and acting moral. Mainly what I have seen. Here are some examples that I have noticed. Many atheists and non-religious people tend to support anything that is unChristian such as abortions, same-gender marrages, and euthenasia. Non religious people and atheist also practace immoral acts such as sex before marrage, using artifical birth control. This is just what I see from my eyes. I know that my words dont weigh heavely in an atheist majority forum, but these are just my opinions.

Do you really believe that that's what morality is all about?

 

[Sahkuhnder]

I feel that people who are not religious are incapable of being moral and acting moral. Mainly what I have seen. Here are some examples that I have noticed. Many atheists and non-religious people tend to support anything that is unChristian such as abortions, same-gender marrages, and euthenasia. Non religious people and atheist also practace immoral acts such as sex before marrage, using artifical birth control. This is just what I see from my eyes. I know that my words dont weigh heavely in an atheist majority forum, but these are just my opinions.

Bold by me.

Please allow me to tell you how wrong you are as I personally am not religious but certainly live a moral life. We may not exactly agree on every issue, but to reduce the whole of morality to just a few of the most disputed topics unfairly ignores the huge majority of topics that we all agree on.

Have you ever, even once in your life, seen a non-religious person perform a moral act? If the answer is yes, then please read the above bold part of your statement.

 

[GenMarshall]

Please allow me to tell you how wrong you are as I personally am not religious but certainly live a moral life. We may not exactly agree on every issue, but to reduce the whole of morality to just a few of the most disputed topics unfairly ignores the huge majority of topics that we all agree on.

Then what is it that non-Religious people and Religious people agree on?

Have you ever, even once in your life, seen a non-religious person perform a moral act? If the answer is yes, then please read the above bold part of your statement.

Honestly, I have never seen a non-religious person perform a moral act in my life in the real world. So my answer to that question is no.

 

[Perfection]

Then what is it that non-Religious people and Religious people agree on?

I think we both agree that running into a kindergarten spraying bullets into the children constitutes a massive act of evil. I think we both agree that helping people in their time of need is good.

Honestly, I have never seen a non-religious person perform a moral act in my life in the real world. So my answer to that question is no.

Have you ever seen a non-religious person in real life? Who is the non-religious person you know best?

 

[MobBoss]

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

This statement lends me to believe that we are not talking about the same morals I think or obviously the same standards upon which morals are based.

If you think the imperative morality of survival of the fittest is indeed a moral value, ie. animal morals as opposed to pure instinct, then I suppose you would be correct.

If you are referring to the type of morality indicated by the "do unto others" statement, I would say I am correct.

 

[Perfection]

If you are referring to the type of morality indicated by the "do unto others" statement, I would say I am correct.

What makes you think that these sentiments don't come naturally to humans?

 

[MobBoss]

What makes you think that these sentiments don't come naturally to humans?

If it did, we wouldnt have as many wars throughout history as we have had. Oh, we may have it to some degree, but in turn, I will say that such sentiment is largely overpowered by our other base needs, survival, power, sex, food, etc. I believe that it is only through religion that such sentiments are truly brought to the forefront to be explored and seen as valuable and not weak.

All just my opinon of course.

 

[GenMarshall]

Have you ever seen a non-religious person in real life? Who is the non-religious person you know best?

I never seen a non-religious person in real life and I dont know any non-religious that I know best in real life.

 

[Perfection]

If it did, we wouldnt have as many wars throughout history as we have had. Oh, we may have it to some degree, but in turn, I will say that such sentiment is largely overpowered by our other base needs, survival, power, sex, food, etc.

Wars are often faught becase of love! People defend thier nation, thier race, their family, out of love! Love is a driving force in war!

I believe that it is only through religion that such sentiments are truly brought to the forefront to be explored and seen as valuable and not weak.

I don't think so. There's numerous secular philosophies that value peace love and understanding. I value these statements, and I'm pretty sure it's not just some sort of "residiual religion".

All just my opinon of course.

It seems contrary to what I've seen.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Wars are often faught becase of love! People defend thier nation, thier race, their family, out of love! Love is a driving force in war!

Hear! Hear! Love is a driving force in all things.

 

[Hotpoint]

And from the last post of the previous thread on this topic...

Society, and therefore some kind of collectively accepted morality, must have existed before Religion or else Religion could not have spread.

In order for a concept of Religion to be passed from one individual or group to another they must have been able to communicate, and therefore cooperation must predate religion.

Cooperation requires at the very least the principle of reciprocity which is surely a foundation of morality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=168217&highlight=Religion+Morality+Communication

 

[MobBoss]

Wars are often faught becase of love! People defend thier nation, thier race, their family, out of love! Love is a driving force in war!

Very weak argument. People dont have to defend their nation, if no one is invading. People dont invade another nation because of love - its because they want what the other people have. Love is not a driving force in war.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Very weak argument. People dont have to defend their nation, if no one is invading. People dont invade another nation because of love - its because they want what the other people have. Love is not a driving force in war.

Love of self, love of others and love of things makes the world go around.

 

[MobBoss]

Love of self, love of others and love of things makes the world go around.

So narcissim, lust and greed make the world go around? Possibly.

But I re-iterate, love is not why nations go to war. It is almost always about lust for power, certainly not love.

 

[Birdjaguar]

So narcissim, lust and greed make the world go around? Possibly.

But I re-iterate, love is not why nations go to war. It is almost always about lust for power, certainly not love.

Love is a slippery word. Lust for people, power and things is mostly a lesser form of love closer to selfishness (self love) than a caring love or a selfless desire to serve one's beloved.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

I never seen a non-religious person in real life and I dont know any non-religious that I know best in real life.

I want to believe what you say here but I'm having trouble with this answer.

Have to ever been to a store, a mall, McDonald's, a public school, a movie theater, a sporting event or simply walked down a public street?

Are you a hermit of some kind? I'm only asking because it is not normal to have never in your entire life been in public, and if you've been in public then you have seen non-religious people.

Then what is it that non-Religious people and Religious people agree on?

Most of the morals from the bible for starters. Theft is immoral. Adultery is immoral. Murder is immoral. Lies are immoral. Cheating is immoral. Truth and honesty are moral. Obeying authority figures like your parents is moral. Treating your fellow man as you would wish to be treated is moral. Pointless destruction is immoral. Conservation and wise use of our planet's resources is moral. I'm sure you can think of more examples if you tried to.

Do people break these rules sometimes? Yes. But my point is that they are generally followed by both religious and non-religious people.

Honestly, I have never seen a non-religious person perform a moral act in my life in the real world. So my answer to that question is no.

Click on the links in my sig for an example of both religious and non-religious people working together for the moral cause of helping to find a cure to a list of diseases.



@ Hotpoint -

Excellent post.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

Morality is a given through nature and humanistic ideals, because God created nature and humanity to reflect them.

Morals are written in the hearts and minds, and social interactions between human beings. So no, you don't need religion to understand morals, however (at least in my opinion) morals exist as a result of God creating them.

So, yeah, radioactive monkey .

 

[Syntherio]

I think every well-bred people can act moral. Some don´t want it, some want it - No matter if they are religious or not.

Nearly every religious man/woman act after a certain morality code, because they fear the consequences, if they wouldn´t. They know that code from their parents and their priests,mullahs,etc.

Nonreligious people also have a morality code. They know it from their parents. But they don´t fear hell or damnation, they follow that code because of social consideration. A society must have certain rules, without it there would be anarchy.

The immoral religious people are expelled from church and are called "sinner" or "atheist".
The immoral nonreligious people are selfish criminals or sociopaths and the worst of them are put into jail.

 

[GenMarshall]

I want to believe what you say here but I'm having trouble with this answer.

Have to ever been to a store, a mall, McDonald's, a public school, a movie theater, a sporting event or simply walked down a public street?

Are you a hermit of some kind? I'm only asking because it is not normal to have never in your entire life been in public, and if you've been in public then you have seen non-religious people.

I am not a hermit of any kind. I have been to a store, mall, McDonalds (Eventhough I dont like their food and perfer Burger King and/or Wendy's), public school, the movies, and even walked down a public street. I still dont see non-Religious people, agnostics, and atheists who are doing moral good on the streets. Its not like non-Religious, atheists, or agnostics have a big gigantic billboard on their head saying what faith or lack of there when they are doing good.

I have known an atheist on campus who used to be freinds with my Catholic ex-GF untill we broke up (The atheist began to start being mean to her two months before we broke up because of some stupid thing the atheist witness my ex-GF did, but thats as far as I can go). Today this atheist would often times antagonise my ex-GF (who I am still good freinds BTW) as well as acting mean to her. To me , that left me an image that atheists cannot be moral if they hurt their fellow neighbor.

Click on the links in my sig for an example of both religious and non-religious people working together for the moral cause of helping to find a cure to a list of diseases.

Still not convinced that morality is not dependent on religion and still not convinced that non-Religious people are capable of being moral.