To do the right thing is usually going to benefit everybody. When it is hard to do something, we usually back away. In Catholicism there are two different types of sorrow perfect and un perfect ( I forgot the other name for it) so the belief that you are sorry for lying some one can be "divided" either it is because he will find out and be furious or it is because you but or broke his trust. Really and truly most of them actually care about you instead of their own benefit or loss. Unconditional love.
Atheists are one of the most disliked groups in America. Only 45 percent of Americans say they would vote for a qualified atheist presidential candidate, and atheists are rated as the least desirable group for a potential son-in-law or daughter-in-law to belong to. Will Gervais at the University of British Columbia recently published a set of studies looking at why atheists are so disliked. His conclusion: It comes down to trust.
Theist seem to be trustworthy but they are just using peoples fear to their personal benefits.Generally people tend to go to a theist when they are fearful and when a person is in fear he will trust anyone who help him so they are not as much trustworthy as they seem.
I am not a fan of generalizations, as I believe someone's religion beliefs or lack of religious beliefs has minimal correlation to honesty, but my opinion is, many theists are more trustworthy than their atheist counterparts due to the principles of honesty that are embedded and taught through their respective religions, however, many theists can be swayed in negative directions by their religions which balances the statistics. On the whole though, peoples trustworthiness is hardly correlated with their religious beliefs.
If you compare populations to federal prison populations, you will notice that the percentages are about the same. For instance, about 70% of people in the U.S. are Christian and about 75 - 80% of the federal prison population is Christian so slightly higher. Atheists on the other hand are about 3% of the population but from 0.2 - 0.07% of federal prison population. (1)(2)(3) That's not only less but less than 1/10th of our national percentage. In other words, being theist makes you over 10 times more likely to to end up in federal prison.
I think the reasons for such a contrast are fairly logical. First off, seeing that atheists have no god, they have no god to kill for or defend. I have yet to hear of someone killing in the name of Darwin or Hubble. Other factors are likely blame and forgiveness. You see, most religions blame bad acts on supernatural villains like demons or Satan. It's not the theists fault that they did wrong because the devil tricked them. Atheists, on the other hand, have only themselves to blame if they do wrong. Forgiveness too has it's moral drawbacks. If you lie or cheat and feel guilty about it, a theist can pray for or confess it to the clergy and feel better about their past misdeeds instantly. In contrast, atheist would continue to feel guilty about what they did so the unpleasant feeling of guilt lasts longer making a bigger impression that doing wrong makes you feel bad.
I think the simplest way for atheists to be perceived as more trustworthy is to be open about their lack of belief in God. There’s a wealth of social psychological evidence that shows contact with members of disliked groups can reduce prejudice. In addition, my own research (published last year in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin) has revealed that simply knowing that there are lots of atheists in the world makes atheists seem more trustworthy.
As more people realize that there are lots of atheists around, living peaceful, trustworthy lives, the perception that atheists lack a moral compass erodes. In addition, Ara Norenzayan and I have some research (forthcoming in the journal Psychological Science) demonstrating that reminding people of other institutions that help keep people cooperative—secular institutions like police, contracts, and courts—also reduces distrust of atheists. And open atheists might be able to help remind people that there are lots of solid, nonreligious motivations for moral behavior.
That said, being an open atheist isn’t necessarily the same thing as being a strident, “in your face” atheist. Nobody really likes having their core beliefs attacked. My hunch is that “I’m here, I’m an atheist, and it’s really not that big of a deal” would be a more effective approach than a Dawkinsian “I’m here, I’m an atheist, and religions are mass delusions” approach, in terms of increasing acceptance and trust of people who don’t believe in God.
~~ Will Gervais is a doctoral candidate in social psychology at the University of British Columbia.
This falls down to the silly argument that most theists use, "Our religion teaches us to be good, you don't have a religion, so you can't be good".
This moronic argument is based on the premise that morals come from religion, rather than from human nature itself.
Every single major religion throughout history has had the same basic moral principles, that proves that it's something universal and thereby has nothing to do with religion.....
Theology isn't the origin of human morality. Laws predate major organized religions, and if this is the case, we can conclude that our moral philosophy is inherent in ourselves as we learn to interact and coexist with each other. Religion and what particular faith you subscribe to is by default irrelevant as to how humans behave.