There are 9 choices, 13 votes for Exo's debate

Morality Without God

Is there morality without religion?


  • Ball rolling where, what??

    Morality Without God

    Exo said, "It is has been most common for "Jesus-Screamer's" to come about with the good ol' "Atheist's lack morals because they lack religion." Today, I will stomp your face so far into the gosh darn ground, that you'll cease to realize that religion has nothing to do with morality."

    -----

    What religion and what Jesus screamers? been in church all my life and never heard that certain accusation. Morals have little to do with Jesus' purpose by the way.

    YES: Science was revealed in the Bible.

    YES: God DOES teach men chemistry, biology, mathematics, how to overcome sickness, to cure the ill, how to farm and every single art of science and all is in your Bible. God DOES teach men to invent products to help with civilization.

    Have you read the Bible at all, Exo???

    Your right; God is not about morals as much as He is trying to love you, teach love, teach grace and mercy. That is where morals become an action, with a personal inspiration and cause.

    38%  Voted for by frndofyaweh, bob2314, Applehead, Esfuerzo, pnktrky.
    View 9 comments
  • :

  • Morality Without God

    It is has been most common for "Jesus-Screamer's" to come about with the good ol' "Atheist's lack morals because they lack religion." Today, I will stomp your face so far into the goddamn ground, that you'll cease to realize that religion has nothing to do with morality.

    Now, let's get the ball rolling.

    In the numerous debates that I have read and participated in, most have come to the conclusion that morality was either invented or inspired by religion for the most part. The Bible appears to of been dictated or inspired by God, so that man will know his will for life. If you turn to Leviticus in your Bible, you will find quite a number of morals and sins, as well as punishments for these behaviors.

    Christianity has been wide-known to be a "revealed" religion. Why? Because Christianity was revealed to man by God. That compared to other religions, man sought/found God, or thought they did. But, in regards for Christianity, God sought man and found him. What I question is, what was revealed to man by God? Surely, it was not science. This whole foundation of physical science was gradually learned and still in the process. God did not teach men chemistry, biology, mathematics, how to overcome sickness, to cure the ill, how to farm, or any of the arts of science. God did not teach men to invent products to help with civilization. Man discovered thousands upon thousands of things that God did not teach or reveal. I have come to the conclusion that mankind would of done so whether he was aware of the idea of God or not.

    Since God did not reveal man science. It is said that God gave him morality. Per say, the Ten Commandments. Man was told that he must not steal, to not murder, he was told that children must honor their parents. Supposedly, without God's moral laws that would leave us without authority and our decency would then not exist in human society.

    Therefore, it is said quite bluntly that morality now depends upon the religious belief system, or is it?

    Let's think as if we had never received this revelation from God or that there was never a belief in God to begin with. Your telling me that, if there was no morality without religion, a mother would of never developed the love of her child, or even men and women would of never grown a love for each other, and that among both- any value consisting of honesty or loyalty would of never existed? After all, considering that as humans, we would of eventually observed a female animal caring for its young and even to the edge of risking it's own life for it. Countless times have we observed animals defend each other, unite to stalk down a prey. And within the lifestyle of animals, they also require courting time, mating time, and somewhere along the line, a brief time of a "family" exists. Of coarse, this all happened without God and religion. If animals were capable to develop these basic moral stages without the revelation of God, why wouldn't mankind?

    Saying that morality would of never existed without the belief in God or even the revelation by God is basically saying that man would of been incapable to discover the value of being honest and loyal. That man would of never of learned the terms of good and bad, for those very words implies moral judgement, and there would of been no such thing without God and religion. (Or so I am told.)

    In most expressions, saying that if we destroy religion would be destroying all moral confinements. CONFINEMENTS, are you crazy? That term alone is definitely considered a revelation. A man is restrained from stealing in a store because there are camera's present or a police officer near by. By acting in defiance, such as breaking into a house, vandalizing property, or even violence is restrained because of his conscious impulse. Whether it is God or a policeman, or anyone to witness him do such defiance.

    Now, what we define to be moral rules can be treated much more as what you would treat a regulation. For example, sex before marriage. This order is submitted to mankind, and if he disobeys- he will be punished. If not punished now, then hereafter. We ask why a man would not impose these restraints if there is no future life in which it would be rewarded or punished, and why would a man not just enjoy himself and be over with it already. Of coarse, this is all wrong. An average man is not conscious of restraint when he behaves in a manner that is relatively decent. A mother when she devotes her will and power to nursing her own child that is sick, or her will and power to go out and work to her full advantage to supply it with food is not conscious of restraint. Nor is a man who is in presence of a friends home in a conscious of restraint when he avoids from pocketing money, or will steal a purse that has been left out in the open. Nor is a man who borrows money from the bank feels no restraint because he returns the money. A man who does, is not a "good" man. In fact, a criminal who does not act out in crime for the mere reason that he is afraid of being caught red-handed is not defined a "good" man at all.

    Morality has either a natural or a supernatural foundation. A man is not cured from cancer because he set an example of good morality. Nor is a man cursed with a burden of a broken leg because he is acknowledged as a criminal in thought and/or act. Because nature is not moral or immoral. Only terms will be applicable when there is a conscious action that will be given an end. Therefore, nature is amoral and nature does not "punish" or "reward" us such immoral or moral behaviors. There are only actions and consequences in nature. We will benefit or we will suffer depending on our act. There is absolutely NO ethical quality in natural happenings. The laws of morals are created by humans because of experience.

    Man did not first discover biology or even physiology to learn the functions/activities of their body parts. Such as, eating and breathing. Nor did the rules stated in the ten commandments. "The fact creates the rule; it is not the rule that creates the fact." --- Remember that.

    Let's define "good" and "bad". It is the consequences of actions that will classify it as good or bad. Because if we could create actions that did not consist of consequences, they would not be considered morals at all. There is no such thing as good in the abstract. What we would call good would be in relation to whether there was a consequence or not or the end that we were aiming for. It is the action that will make the consequence good or bad. When it comes to adaption and environments, morality terms are related to not an individual. . A group that enlarges will need more moral qualities that will take on a wider application. A man by himself would not be kind, if there was no one to be kind to. And so forth. A man never does exist as an individual only that fights for his own hand and has thoughts and intentions that are only concerned for his own welfare. A man is always a member of a group, and that alone will develop a kind of discipline that gives direction to the character. And the larger the group gets, the more the process of selection will grow. A man who shows dim signs of loyalty will be most likely shunned, wiped out, replaced because the welfare of the whole is far more greater. Social life contains a kind of discipline that will train fitness to a man who will work along with the rest of the group for a mutual advantage. Therefore, there are social rules to follow for an individual to observe his own life as a member. But, usually man is not conscious of these discipline's in the process of adapting to his environment, same with an animal. Moralizing will be recognizable, not a conscious process. A participation in the social life within a group doesn't just consist of avoiding from injury, it involves a positive contribute to the whole.

    Not only does these things mold our character and morals. There are also aspects such as truthfulness, loyalty, kindness and others of the sort that are surrounded by one from the very moment of birth. And those who give him the language to speak and stores knowledge that he will possess will also provide him with a more or less compelled guide to his life and ideals. Which gives me the idea that the subject of morality is an adaption of feelings and ideas that are supported by a human or an animal group.

    Within morality, there is no need for a supernaturalism. Moral feelings will create the moral law, some tend to get that backwards. To me, morality has nothing to do with God or a future life. I find it very highly doubtful that there is any reason to wonder about the mystery of morality, because there is no mystery, when it obviously expresses the physiology of social life. Morality is always developing, when nature is always working up again what had already existed. Which is the path to all evolution, and the feelings of right and wrong are and will always be gradually expanded between groups, to tribes, to the nation, then to the whole entire human society. The environment that man has always adapted to will continuously expand, along with the feelings of morality and then the laws.

    -Nicci

    Voted for by Exo.
    View 3 comments
  • :

  • MAN 'S ORIGIN IS GOD

    Man was created in the image God.So, although rebellious at times, he has Godly traits, which is why man moral standards tends to agree with the word of God.

    So, man has inborn Godly traits because that is, where he originated from.

    Whats wrong with God centered morality, anywhere? If it is producing the desired results and people are living in peace and harmony, whats wrong with it?

    What makes one think morality without God is good for human being, I wonder?

    Morality without God is only possible if God did not exist and did not create man.

    Voted for by likewhatitis100.
    View 8 comments
  • :

  • GOD DICTATES HOW THINGS HAPPEN HERE ON EARTH

    Your wish to have morality without God, I take it as an acknowledgement by you that God exists. If God did not exist in your view, you would not have wished to have morality without non-existent God. So, I take it in your view God exists. Therefore, your logic should tell you that God being the creator of the whole universe, and everything in it, has control over it.

    So, nothing will happen without his approval since he is in control of everything. Everything that will happen will go his way and definitely not your way. Therefore, God dictates how things happen here on earth.

    Voted for by likewhatitis100.
    View 2 comments
  • :

  • yes

    to cut a very, very long story very, very short in relation to your very, very long story. It is called personal morality. Religion can go jump.

    Voted for by grant.
    View 3 comments
  • :

  • No

    In Washington's farewell address he said:

    ***You cannot have national morality apart from religious principle***

    I believe that quote is 100% correct!

    Voted for by Energizer Bunny.
    Add a comment
  • :

  • To each, their own

    We collect morals throughout our short lives and yes, religion is one of those places where you could pick up a few but there are other places in which we can collect morals. i have collected morals from almost every corner of my life, from school right down to the books i read (examples, learning to read people in order to help them and not judging people because they can surprise you at any time by doing something out of character). Morals are not little stone tablets that we are just handed in a church, but intangible ideas that, when we least expect it, they touch our hearts and change us forever.

    Voted for by Kazrith.
    Add a comment
  • :

  • *confused*

    What do you mean by morality, first of all? By definition, morality is: the quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. If you mean that, then YES, there can be morality without religion. Right and Wrong is not dictated by religion, but by the PEOPLE. Right and Wrong are dictated by all kinds of people (even atheists). Just because I'm an atheist, does not mean I do not have morals. In fact, my religion are the HUMAN morals. But, what's beautiful about this world is diversity. What's Right and Wrong for you, might not be right or wrong for me.

    I'm curios...what does being in accord with standards of right or good conduct have to do with religion?

    Voted for by Stella Cadente.
    View 4 comments
  • :

  • Morality Of God
    If moral behavior requires religion then by that logic god can't be moral because he has no religion.

    Of course if you have read the bible then you know god does not have any morals.

    evolouie
    Voted for by Evolouie.
    Add a comment
  • :

    •  

    None of the choices fit your opinion?  Add one →