Discussions

Atheism - Is morality without religion possible?

Posted by trulyskewed • 10/26/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: religion

I was just listening to NPR's 'Your Call' and heard a show with the president of Freedom From Religion Foundation, a group that pushes for separation of church and state, and provides a voice for a growing number of atheists in America, including a billboard campaign. Some callers were pretty angry with her.

What do you think? If atheism keeps growing, what will happen? Atheist president? Decline of America? Imagine no religion!!

User Comments

10/26/09

HollytheHousewife

Dang....no one's answering,maybe u should try to do this when all the atheists are awake,haha

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  yeah, well I live in Taiwan so I'm wide eyed!!
10/26/09

HollytheHousewife

Tehehe,are there not taiwanese atheist up with u?? Maybe u should try google,haha

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  What about you? Shouldn't you be in bed? You can ponder theological questions after a good night's sleep.
10/26/09

HollytheHousewife

I should be,but I had to pull an all nighter because I'm trying to organize clothes. I'm switching seasons and it takes me all night to launder all our stuff and switch out closets....

Its ok though,I will take a couple of power 30's in between school,work,and pickin up my girls from school.

[reply]
10/26/09

iratedog

This question was put to me by my Grandma once. As an atheist I say, unreservedly, YES. Indeed, a better question would be, "Is morality WITH religion possible?".

There's this story here in the UK at the moment for example: Church of England priests are accepting an invitation from the Vatican to join the Catholic faith because they're unhappy with women becoming priests and homosexuality. Does that sound moral to you?

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  Thanks for the reply I.D.
  
  To be honest, I don't see how homosexuality and morality/immorality have anything to do with each other at all.
2. 10/26/09
  
  iratedog
  
  I'd say it was immoral for priests to try to stop people being homosexual. I'd say it was immoral for homosexuals to have lesser rights than the rest of us.
10/26/09

lotusb

Personally I am NOT religious. I beleive that religion was and is the downfall of EVERY government. There should be a seperation of church and state, as it is in our constitution. People who do not beleive in God are not BAD people. NOR are people (like myself) who don't believe in religion ATHIEST.

I think if there were an athiest president it would be NONE of anyone's business. I think it may mean there would be a much more fair approach to civil matters such as gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research and drug laws.

I think religion is something we are going to see less and less of. I am a spiritual person and I don't need to play follow the leader to prove that.

[reply]
10/26/09

morgantj

Ones moral compass is outside of religion. It is with this same moral compass that one determines what is "right" and "wrong" "good" and "bad" in a religion. It doesn't come from it.

Modern morality is not the same as the morality of ancient times, because it has evolved. For example, most countries don't find burning witches as morally acceptable anymore. The bible says it is acceptable, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." if morality that comes from God is the real thing. It is absolute. It is correct then why don't we follow through with burning witches today?

Morals are created by society, philosophy, individual conscience, etc... and religion just attempts to "resell" these values as their own and goes so far as to say these values come from a "higher authority." They do this in a attempt to make these moral values "seem" objective instead of man-made subjective values.

Theist pick and choose what to believe is right and good in the bible according to the moral values of modern times. The moral compass they use to pick and choose what to adhere to in the bible and what not to did not come from the bible they are pondering.

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  iratedog
  
  Excellently put.
2. 10/26/09
  
  Rivy
  
  I agree. Thoughtful and well said.
3. 10/26/09
  
  voodooKobra
  
  I agree as well.
4. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  I agree, well said, except if people still believed in witches, I don't think they would have a moral problem with burning them. So maybe the morals haven't changed, but the world view has changed.
10/26/09

CentricStudios

"What do you think? If atheism keeps growing, what will happen? Atheist president? Decline of America? Imagine no religion!!"

Freedom would happen. And people would grow up and stop arguing about little stupid differences they have with one another.

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  MadameX
  
  Seems unlikely. More likely, the tables would just turn, as they have in Canada, and it would be a different group (those holding religious faith) who were legally prohibited from living as their beliefs dictated.
10/26/09

Rivy

Most surveys I believe show the U.S. to have the highest percentage of religious believers of all 1st world countries.

What 1st world country has the highest rates of social violence?

What 1st world country has the largest number of prison inmates?

Not too encouraging.

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  morgantj
  
  I heard or read that secular societies fair much better in these polls then religious societies do.
10/26/09

trulyskewed

So everybody here thinks that the rise of atheism/ decline in religionists numbers is a good thing? I don't believe it.

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  morgantj
  
  why don't you believe it?
2. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  I don't believe it...Where are those who feel America is great because it's a Christian nation? Who feel that homosexuality is an affront to God-given marriage? Those who would never think of voting for a president who wasn't demonstrably Christian? I think they're just staying quiet right now.
3. 10/26/09
  
  morgantj
  
  That doesn't answer my question. Why don't you believe that more atheists and less religious people would be a good thing? Are you just looking for people to confirm what you already believe?
4. 10/26/09
  
  trulyskewed
  
  That's not what I was referring to when I said 'I don't believe it'. What I meant was I don't believe that everyone in Blog Catalog who looked at this discussion believes the same thing, as reflected in all these answers. Nobody has stated that religion is necessary for morality.
5. 10/26/09
  
  morgantj
  
  oh okay, gotcha.
10/26/09

crpitt

I don't need a bible or a religion to calibrate my moral compass, so for me personally, yes it is possible.

[reply]
10/26/09

aspotofblog

Yes it is. In fact, I've found that some atheists are more moralistic than some religious zealots.

[reply]
10/26/09

wagerwitch

Considering I think that Religion is the most evil thing - not the concept of a sweet God - but the concept of IF YOU DON'T FOLLOW these rules - everyone else is gonna go to heaven and you're going to go to hell...

Or PAY this money to THIS place...

or YOU ARE A SINNER!

I just don't believe in that.

I also don't think that religion is justice.

I think that there are MANY religions.

If there is to be an Atheist President I would not wince.

Religion is not what is important...

HOW they act and WHO they are IS.

I - like others do not need religion to guide my moral compass.

I believe in the GOLDEN RULE - "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

And I believe in the "GREATER GOOD" of humankind.

[reply]
10/26/09

nothingprofound

Unfortunately, morality is possible without religion. Morality is basically a means of judging and controlling people. And there are other ways to do that besides religion.

[reply]
10/26/09

polybore

"Is morality without religion possible?"

It is difficult to say because historically religion has shaped our view of morality.

It is all well and good atheists denying religion today but they cannot deny the role all religions have played in defining what we now consider to be morally acceptable.

Frankly without religion humanity would probably resemble Ash's fond admiration for the Alien (Alien).

"I admire its purity, a survivor; unclouded by conscience,
remorse or delusions of morality"

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  aspotofblog
  
  'It is all well and good atheists denying religion today but they cannot deny the role all religions have played in defining what we now consider to be morally acceptable.'
  
  You do make a very valid point there, polybore.
  
  We have never been exposed to a world completely free of religion, and therefore it's impossible to give an accurate answer.
2. 10/26/09
  
  polybore
  
  Indeed aspotofblog. To test this theory out we need a control planet without religion hence polybore's reference to popular culture ie Alien.
10/26/09

nothingprofound

Unfortunately, that role for the most part hasn't been a particularly beneficial one.

[reply]
1. 10/26/09
  
  polybore
  
  Would disagree with you there. Although religions influence can hardly be described as a having been a bed of roses the fact remains that hundreds of years of religious scholarship have defined the laws and liberties we take for granted today.
2. 10/26/09
  
  nothingprofound
  
  I think you're overestimating the role religion has played in that regard. Many sectarian philosophers and thinkers have added their two cents to that debate and in most cases their input has been more flexible and less biased.
3. 10/26/09
  
  aspotofblog
  
  'Unfortunately, that role for the most part hasn't been a particularly beneficial one.'
  
  Yes, I believe that religion has done more harm than good.
4. 10/26/09
  
  polybore
  
  Estimation is not required. It is hard to discount things like science, teaching, law, books, study, philosophy, medicine etc etc
  
  Maybe they were not so hot on morality but without religions it is difficult to see where the framework for modern life and morality would have come from.
10/26/09

harveyavatar

From the Xtian to the human rights activist, most anyone today weilds Kants categorical moral imperative - in essence "do unto others, as others... but also, "might makes right"). Kant reduces man to his moral and religious dimensions.

Metaphysically (ie first philosophy) speaking, morals are simply the consequences of a philosophical quest of Being.
beingandquirckiness.blogspot.com/2009/01/categorical-imperative.html

[reply]
10/26/09

Theresa111

Why doesn't everyone agree to allow the next person their right of religious freedom. Whether is be to practice a concept generally recognized or to not practice this way. We have free will and it is our human right to believe whichever way we are so inclined to do.

"World Peace!"

[reply]
10/26/09

anthony9910

I'm a Atheist, I don't believe in religion, religion brings wars, wars lead to deaths...

Being a Atheist doesn't mean I don't respect others with different opinions(Jose Saramago(PT literature nobel) called sun of the b***** to God in he's last book), however I think the World would be better without religion...

In Portugal, the Prime Minister is Atheist.

[reply]
10/26/09

Rivy

Religion may shape our views of morality. But before "morality" became a term, it was embedded in our natural instinct for survival. We developed as herd beings. We bonded into tribes. Being a tribe member more likely ensured our own survival. We helped each other hunt, find food. If a member of our tribe feel from a log crossing a stream, we instinctively reached out and tried to pull that person to safety. Even if doing so put our own being a risk. It is in our genes.

It became therefore part of our language - reaching out to others, calling for help, responding - and was melding into our rituals, our visions of good, of gods, and into our religions.

Unfortunately, there have always been those whose personal need for power over-shadowed the needs of the tribe at large. They learned how mold our instincts, reconstruct our rituals, to serve their personal needs. The sad history of many world religions has been the results. It continues today.

[reply]