Should the world become atheist in order to function as a moral society?

  • Yes but it never will

    On paper a world free of religion is ideal. Religion causes so many issues and really does not help anyone live morally. If we could get a completely atheist world it would likely be more moral. Unfortunately this is never going to happen as religion is too big of a part of people's lives.

  • Most definitely so

    Religious morals are the worst morals. Sure, every religious man will tell you that his/her god preaches peace and love and tolerance, but all of those beliefs and quotes are cherry picked out of their religions book. The Bible states that if your child disobeys you, you must beat him, if he talks back then you must kill him. Another example is the oppression of women, if your wife commits adultery you must stone her to death or a raped woman must marry her rapist I mean the list goes on forever. As a homosexual I have been personally victimized by the religious and told that god hates me and I shall burn in hell for eternity. That doesnt sound very moral to me. But just for the record, It is a scientific fact that Atheists/Agnostics have higher morals.

  • Religion by it's very nature limits morality.

    Although many religions presuppose their religion is a proponent of morality, they limit moral values to a handful of self promoting morals. Morality is a result of evolutionary process that increases herd size. The larger the herd, or as we humans like to call it "civilization," the greater our chance of survival has been. I will give potential merit to the hypothesis that humans idea of religion may also serve an evolutionary process. This idea can be summed up as religious ideologies inhibit co-mingling of herds and frequently incite an aggressive response that results in the deaths of large portions of each herd and therefore keep the herd populations at a sustainable level. I would be hard pressed to find a current or historic religion that ultimately did not promote a very immorally world attitude.
    Should the world, I assume the intention is the humanity of the world wish to co-exist peaceable, then a global "morality" will need to be defined and while it may use some morals that exist in current world religions, we will have to limit the moral values to ones that benefit society as a whole and not a subset religious groups limited versions.

  • Theism is intrinsically divisive and harbors eternal contempt for non-believers:

    The only way world peace can be achieved and maintained is through a Secular or essentially Atheist leadership. If policies or rules are produced favoring any particular religion, then there will be dissent felt by people of other faiths within the society. So all policies and decisions by any government, must be religiously neutral of better still, pertaining to no religious beliefs, Secular or Atheist.
    Even the US founding fathers in the 18th Century realized this, and this fact has not changed, only made more obvious.

  • I don't see why not.

    Humans developed morality based on altruism during the early days of humanity in order to better survive together with other tribes. The same can be seen in today's society.

    Although good and bad people will always exist no matter religion or lack thereof, there is no necessity to follow an ancient holy book in regards to right or wrong. These are things we eventually find out for ourselves through reason and empathy, otherwise we soon realize how hard life could be by not playing nice with others. That's how most modern societies function.

    So yes, there's nothing special theists can provide in areas of morality that atheists wouldn't be able to as well.

  • Yes, if by atheist you mean secular.

    In an age of plurality and globalization, all the major world religions must be willing to to admit at least two things:

    1. That they might not be the only legitimate game on the block.

    2. That their world view might be becoming obsolete.

    With that in mind, the only camp that I know of that stands ready to reckon with these issues is secular humanism. Very few staunchly religious people can value their own religion AND another's, both equally for their human value. Yet valuing our humanity in all religions (and non-religions) is -by definition- what secular humanism IS.

    All in all, as I see it, only atheism is up to the task of working out a truly global morality. This is because it has no entangling alliances but to morality itself.

  • Without the religion, Moral law becomes relativistic,

    To begin my point, first question that we need to pose ourselves is- "Why do we need to be moral in an atheistic worldview?", "How would I know if my act is really moral?" "Because I live, I let others live" this would be the basic moral line..! In one culture People love each other, in other culture, they eat each other.., how do you judge them? We do not have any unique value for HUMAN BEING in scientific worldview, we are just combination of atoms., there is no difference in eating a chicken and eating a MAN. Is there? In religious, MAN is unique, MAN has value because he is created in the image of God(says bible), We ought to love each other. Aren't seeing Many People are being killed by giving experimental drugs in scientific world view..! LOVE is the only religion which takes us to morality..! And I see this unconditional love which existed even before the universe came into existence in GODHEAD, can be understood and implement only through biblical way of life( I am not from a christian background). Logically it makes sense for me than any other worldview..!

  • How would that help

    Turning our back on God is not going to increase people's morality.

    Many people in the world do the right thing for reward in the afterlife, without knowledge of that reward, they would not bother. A very high number of people are not even capable of doing the right thing just because it's the right thing to do because their sense of empathy does not always fully develop.

  • No it should not.

    I think the world needs to be allowed to choose any religion the people want for it to function properly. We all bring different morals to the table that allows us to teach one another and learn from each other giving us a better and more moral society to live in.

  • No, atheism does not equal morality.

    The world would not necessarily be more moral if it were atheist; in fact, it could potentially be much less so. A lot of the world's moral foundation comes from beliefs held by Muslims, Jews, and Christians, such as the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments. While there would possibly be less religious turmoil if people chose to become atheist, doing so would also remove core faith beliefs that have shaped morality. Aside from that, there are sadly things in the world other than religion that people find to fight and wage wars against.

  • This is WHERE we are now... Robotic Human in becoming!!!

    An explosion of Atheist group of humans invading planet earth. ATHEIST + TECHNOLOGY + SCIENCE VS GOD (FAVORITISM DEMONIC ATTACK, weakening every one against hell attack) = END OF THE WORLD PSYCHOLOGICALLY = DOOM DAY FOR EVERY HUMAN OF THIS PLANET!!! Free mental psychic disorder disease FOR EVERY ONE = THANK YOU!!!! :P I hate you gang of atheist!!!!
    WAKE UP all other = please stop that! You will make stop human to be beautiful in their disfunctionnal every day, too many stop looking at the default and pointing that every one default is the reason why the planet is dooming...

    WRONG!!!! YOU are so wrong, this is ALL the fault of the devil that sleep inside of each of us and you let your OWN demon take over you. What is the most despicable, people STOP FIGHTING to get a better life. This is what happen of the REAL DOOM DAY! They complain on the internet, no more face to face! Internet is better than this, this, this and that! This is despicable, the best technology WONT RESOLVE DISPUTE THAT GROW ALL OVER THE WORLD! THEY SPLIT CONVERSATION FAR AWAY OF EACH OTHER and every one start to tell = Every one on the planet BECOMING FAKE!

    Are you willing to become atheist and SO FAKE and so believe in the future of electronic + science? You feeding the new Ante Christ god who's a bloc of artificial intelligence, not a human but could move one day into human. Or in a well called "DJIN'S" will become the new monster who could control this wordls.

    Just think of it... Star Wars reality is at one step to become our every day world. It will happen if the planet doesn't explode. Humans could become prisonners and if we are not already slave of some sort of martian mind controled by distance? I'm not crazy, I'm pushing further a theory "From impossible to possible!" Check this out, I'm the spectator of the disaster you ALL MAKE with so many wrong choice and not fighting against the good point but with the wrong team.

  • No, no direct link

    Saying the elimination of religion will solve all moral obligations is just as stupid as saying the adoption of religion everywhere will. There's nothing here that proves an atheist planet will be any more moral than the one we currently have, atheists and religious people are both capable of being immoral.

  • The world should not.

    The world should not become atheist in order to function as a moral society. There is no reason for people to have to give up their religion for the world's society to have better moral values. What people will need to do is stop worry about what people believe and just treat people with kindness.

  • No objective morality

    A purely atheistic world would have no ontological grounds to categorically define anything in terms of good and evil, only what will lead to greater utility in society. I find it contradictory that atheist assume ontological grounds when they attack the Bible for not showing good morals, when they have no ontological basis to judge an action in terms of good and evil, since morality is mainly due to kin selection.

    In a purely atheistic world, societies that practiced child sacrifice and cannibalism would not be immoral, since the practices were considered beneficial to the majority in those societies.

  • No, this would require that only one group live moral lives

    This presupposes that atheism is the Only belief system that promotes moral behavior. If this were true a "yes" answer would be appropriate. I do not believe this to be the case. Moral conduct is promoted by many religions as well as most of the individuals who make up these religions . It is also promoted by atheistic and agnostic groups, and most of the individuals who hold these views. One could argue that the true test is what is lived rather than what is promoted. This is true as well, but I think ample evidence exists of moral behavior in all of these groups. No group holds a monopoly on right and wrong behavior.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Sagey says2014-01-19T12:35:08.820
Theists keep highlighting Ten Commandments, these existed long before religion, they are evolved traits that exist in many creatures other than humans, as simply a way for group dependent creatures to live in harmony.
The Golden Rule does not always apply to every circumstance.
Atheism considers such rules more rationally than Theists and apply them only after a rational consideration of the consequences into the future, while Theists consider them as God given laws and apply them without proper rational consideration.
A secular world is thus a far more Rational one, it is also a more humanistic one.
Secularists don't just enact laws simply because a God said to, as theists do; they consider the consequences far more carefully and thus make better decisions for the future. Acting on their so called God's word is the reasoning behind such massacres as the Witch hunts that murdered thousands of innocent people and the Inquisitions where they massacred non-believers (heretics).
Sagey says2014-01-19T12:36:29.270
Imagine the Golden rule applied to a B&D freak, whipping everybody because he/she loves to be whipped.