|
Well, Humans can be moral with out religion and god, but they are in minority. My morality is based on reasoning rather than “religious views”. Well, non-religious people in general are in the minority, though it's a big minority (about 1.1 billion non-religious people in the world according to adherents.com) few of those billion are immoral people, just as few religious people are immoral. What that tells me is that religion or god are NOT the source of morality. Some think that atheists are MORE moral than the religious.
Atheist historian Mitchell Stephens wrote this in 2006: Three arguments, I think, can be made for the proposition that the irreligious are actually more moral than the religious: 1. That religions have actually encouraged violence because such intensity of conviction can lead to intolerance or crusades. Zizek (playing on the Dostoevsky line): "The lesson of today's terrorism is that if God exists, then everything, including blowing up thousands of innocent bystanders, is permitted." 2. That atheists are more moral because a moral law resides in Nature or Humanity, and the atheist's view of this law is not obscured by ancient texts, rituals, tribal feuds or other forms of religious mumbo jumbo. Zizek alludes to this when he talks positively of "merely human constraints and considerations." It was a major theme when the pro-Atheism argument first showed itself in Europe with Baron d'Holbach and, later, young Shelley: There needeth not the hell that bigots frame To punish those who err; earth in itself Contains at once the evil and the cure; And all-sufficing Nature can chastise Those who transgress her law; she only knows How justly to proportion to the fault The punishment it merits. 3. That the religious do good only to cozy up to God (as discussed here). Zizek: "Fundamentalists do what they perceive as good deeds in order to fulfill God's will and to earn salvation; atheists do them simply because it is the right thing to do."
|