U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-28-2008, 04:08 PM
 
190 posts, read 193,271 times
Reputation: 45

Advertisements

I see a lot of discussion in regards to how non-believers can be morally just, law abiding, and upstanding citizens when they have no religious affiliation. Personally, this logic makes absolutely no sense to me because religious adherance does not affect ones actions or behaviors.

If it did, we would expect crime rates (adjusted to population numbers) in the US to be lower in relation to less religious coutries, namely, Canada, Japan, Norway, etc - countries which are overwhelmingly secular. We know however, that this is just not the case - the aforementioned countries are some of the safest, and have much lower numbers of violent and non-violent crime than does the US.

Nationally, we might expect to see the same trend - areas of the US in which religious adherance is more widespead, such as the southern United States. Again, we know this is not true, as the southern United States is just as prone to crime as is the rest of the nation.

Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that belief of religious philosophy has any affect on ones personal actions - humans, like other animals, have evolved over millions of years, and in most, a distinct sense of right and wrong is firmly imprinted within the psyche. Observing animal populations, there are actions which will get individuals thrown out of the community, ostracized, and even killed, if they break rules, or engage in behavior which could be detrimental to that particular community. And as far as I know, wild animals do not practice religion - clearly, religion and morality are two distinct entities.

So, as a non-believer, I find it personally insulting for religious individuals to suggest that people who reject the notion of a god are in some way morally "unjust". Especially considering the reality that religion has been responsible for more strife, death, suffering, ignorance, and atrocious injustices than free thought ever has.

If anything, it's been my experience that religion is a detrimental control mechanism, as it forces people do adhere to strict, often impossible expectations that is just not reasonable for most. As a result, the person may be more prone to engage in "sins", as what religion deems a "sin", is in fact normal, appropriate human behavior - behavior which has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years before humans developed religion.

With all of this said, my question to believers - specifically believers who judge non-believers as individuals with questionable morals - is why?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-28-2008, 04:20 PM
 
Location: Rothschild, WI
4,972 posts, read 11,177,535 times
Reputation: 3382
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinity & beyond View Post
I see a lot of discussion in regards to how non-believers can be morally just, law abiding, and upstanding citizens when they have no religious affiliation. Personally, this logic makes absolutely no sense to me because religious adherance does not affect ones actions or behaviors.

If it did, we would expect crime rates (adjusted to population numbers) in the US to be lower in relation to less religious coutries, namely, Canada, Japan, Norway, etc - countries which are overwhelmingly secular. We know however, that this is just not the case - the aforementioned countries are some of the safest, and have much lower numbers of violent and non-violent crime than does the US.

Nationally, we might expect to see the same trend - areas of the US in which religious adherance is more widespead, such as the southern United States. Again, we know this is not true, as the southern United States is just as prone to crime as is the rest of the nation.

Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that belief of religious philosophy has any affect on ones personal actions - humans, like other animals, have evolved over millions of years, and in most, a distinct sense of right and wrong is firmly imprinted within the psyche.

So, as a non believer, I find it personally insulting for religious individuals to suggest that people who reject the notion of a god are in some way morally "unjust". Especially considering the reality that religion has been responsible for more strife, death, suffering, ignorance, and atrocious injustices than free thought ever has.

If anything, it's been my experience that religion is a detrimental control mechanism, as it forces people do adhere to strict, often impossible expectations that is just not reasonable for most. As a result, the person may be more prone to engage in "sins", as what religion deems a "sin", is in fact normal, appropriate human behavior - behavior which has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years before humans developed religion.

With all of this said, my question to believers - specifically believers who judge non-believers as individuals with questionable morals - is why?
Excellent post and I couldn't agree with you more! I am an atheist, and have never in my life been in trouble with the law. Several Christians I know have been in trouble, whether it be stealing, domestic violence, etc. Like someone else posted on another thread, 90+ percent of prisoners in this country claim to be Christians. Granted, a certain percentage probably turned to religion after being incarcerated, but still...

Personally, since I'm not a complete idiot, I do know the difference between right and wrong. It's been argued many times on this forum that it was still god who gives even us atheists morals. I don't believe that for one second. Just my 2 cents.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 04:29 PM
 
2,957 posts, read 7,059,044 times
Reputation: 1953
All of us moral non-believers are living proof. What more do you need?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 04:54 PM
 
7,102 posts, read 26,015,361 times
Reputation: 7425
Look at it this way.....too many have been raised with the idea that they can sin, do all sorts of bad things, and it's alright because they can ask for forgiveness and then everything is OK. And God loves them anyway, no matter what they do. He hates the sin, but loves the sinner.

It's when the concept of somehow, it will turn out OK in the end, because the bible says that it will if you only believe, everything will be just fine. Being raised like that doesn't instill an idea of personal responsibilty to the community. Living a good, moral life is a practical, common sense way that will pay off in THIS life.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in the middle
600 posts, read 1,207,313 times
Reputation: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinity & beyond View Post
I see a lot of discussion in regards to how non-believers can be morally just, law abiding, and upstanding citizens when they have no religious affiliation. Personally, this logic makes absolutely no sense to me because religious adherance does not affect ones actions or behaviors.

If it did, we would expect crime rates (adjusted to population numbers) in the US to be lower in relation to less religious coutries, namely, Canada, Japan, Norway, etc - countries which are overwhelmingly secular. We know however, that this is just not the case - the aforementioned countries are some of the safest, and have much lower numbers of violent and non-violent crime than does the US.

Nationally, we might expect to see the same trend - areas of the US in which religious adherance is more widespead, such as the southern United States. Again, we know this is not true, as the southern United States is just as prone to crime as is the rest of the nation.

Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that belief of religious philosophy has any affect on ones personal actions - humans, like other animals, have evolved over millions of years, and in most, a distinct sense of right and wrong is firmly imprinted within the psyche. Observing animal populations, there are actions which will get individuals thrown out of the community, ostracized, and even killed, if they break rules, or engage in behavior which could be detrimental to that particular community. And as far as I know, wild animals do not practice religion - clearly, religion and morality are two distinct entities.

So, as a non-believer, I find it personally insulting for religious individuals to suggest that people who reject the notion of a god are in some way morally "unjust". Especially considering the reality that religion has been responsible for more strife, death, suffering, ignorance, and atrocious injustices than free thought ever has.

If anything, it's been my experience that religion is a detrimental control mechanism, as it forces people do adhere to strict, often impossible expectations that is just not reasonable for most. As a result, the person may be more prone to engage in "sins", as what religion deems a "sin", is in fact normal, appropriate human behavior - behavior which has been going on for hundreds of thousands of years before humans developed religion.

With all of this said, my question to believers - specifically believers who judge non-believers as individuals with questionable morals - is why?
The fact that (most) humans have a set of morals that they try to live by and do instinctively know right from wrong is why I believe we were created by God. In other words, the morals we possess as humans were given to us by God. So it's not that I, as a Christian, don't believe that you, as an unbeliever, aren't capable of having morals, I just beleive that you don't give credit to whom credit is due for the morals that you do possess. I also don't believe that our innate sense of right and wrong is something that could have resulted from the evolutionary process. And I disagree that animals have a distinct sense of right and wrong, if that's what you meant by the bolded statement above.

Last edited by Deb in VA; 01-28-2008 at 05:09 PM.. Reason: clarified point
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 07:45 PM
 
190 posts, read 193,271 times
Reputation: 45
None of what was written above is enough to convince me that there is a "god". There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in the middle
600 posts, read 1,207,313 times
Reputation: 332
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinity & beyond View Post
None of what was written above is enough to convince me that there is a "god". There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
I knew that what I wrote wouldn't be enough to convince you there is a God. I was only trying to explain my beliefs about where I think a persons inborn sense of right and wrong comes from...GOD.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2008, 11:33 PM
 
4,439 posts, read 8,621,152 times
Reputation: 1478
Nor, have I found, do you need morals to be religious.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2008, 03:41 AM
 
Location: UK
131 posts, read 302,886 times
Reputation: 80
I agree with origional post and also:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigthirsty View Post
Nor, have I found, do you need morals to be religious.
As i have said in a previous thread concerning morals and religion. The vast majority of people in prison are religious. how does that work? :S
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2008, 08:24 AM
 
Location: The land where cats rule
10,946 posts, read 8,990,140 times
Reputation: 3602
Since morals change over time (human sacrifice was once considered not only moral but a necessity) I have trouble believing that they are god inspired. After all, the claim is that god never changes. Morals are developed by the current society to promote co-operation and fluidity in its people. Inspired by god or religion? No.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 AM.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top