A MORAL SOCIETY WITHOUT GOD OR RELIGION

by fifi40 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  fifi40

  Religion has taught that without a belief in God and in absolute standards there is no genuine moral conduct.

  But for many alive today who do not hold a belief in God, is a moral and good life possible?

  Not to be confused with sin, which is essentially a religous idea defined as disobedience to God, morality concerns itself with observed consequences, so a wrong act can be determined by the effect or harm it causes to others.

  For example religion teaches that in the eyes of God homosexuality is wrong. It is an act of disobedience to God.

  But for those without a belief in God the moral question prevails; does the act of homosexuality between two consenting adults harm others?

  So is morality a human concept concerned with the principle of not harming others and consent?
• 

  Qcmbr

  Morality to me is the basis we use for deciding whether a certain course of action is 'good' or 'bad'.
  
  To me morality is independent of religion and culture and is closer to our inbuilt preferences for kin and clan over others. Other orders of animals show behaviour that is similar to human moral choices just without its sophisticated trappings - for example hunting in packs, recognising an alpha male or female, fighting together against a common enemy. In other words morality is the basis of pack life - it would be impossible to live in society without morals (i.e. they self organise) - in general we must share, tell the truth, respect our elders, favour our families, avoid harming our friends and so on.
  
  Where religion and culture come in is to distort these natural morals - sometimes by extending our self sacrifice to those who will not - on a strictly pack level - reciprocate (love thy neighbour - pray for your enemy - stop and pick up the injured samaritan etc..) and at other times by ignoring your natural morality (shun family - blow yourself up in protest - donate money though your family starve and so on.) We are going through an awkward world phase whereby the local clans have grown to national clans and the national clans are now facing the concept of one global clan. Maybe if we can get past the religious and cultural short sightedness we can achieve with natural morality and a one clan mentatlity what the best aspects of religion and culture have aspired to - peace, tolerance and unity.
• 

  quietlyleaving

  I'm seeing a society of individuals with their own morals. So there is going to be conflict because we are all different.

  religion to me loosely identifies the various sets of morals that people choose to live under. But even within a religion people do have different sets of morals individually.

  But for many alive today who do not hold a belief in God, is a moral and good life possible?

  Yes but people will still need to be flexible with one another and open to dialogue because my good life for instance could infringe on another's enjoyment of life without my knowing it.

  I agree that we need to respect each other's privacy and what they choose to do in private.
• 

  nvrgnbk

  The Affirmations of Humanism:
  A Statement of Principles

  • We are committed to the application of reason and science to the understanding of the universe and to the solving of human problems.
  • We deplore efforts to denigrate human intelligence, to seek to explain the world in supernatural terms, and to look outside nature for salvation.
  • We believe that scientific discovery and technology can contribute to the betterment of human life.
  • We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.
  • We are committed to the principle of the separation of church and state.
  • We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.
  • We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.
  • We believe in supporting the disadvantaged and the handicapped so that they will be able to help themselves.
  • We attempt to transcend divisive parochial loyalties based on race, religion, gender, nationality, creed, class, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, and strive to work together for the common good of humanity.
  • We want to protect and enhance the earth, to preserve it for future generations, and to avoid inflicting needless suffering on other species.
  • We believe in enjoying life here and now and in developing our creative talents to their fullest.
  • We believe in the cultivation of moral excellence.
  • We respect the right to privacy. Mature adults should be allowed to fulfill their aspirations, to express their sexual preferences, to exercise reproductive freedom, to have access to comprehensive and informed health-care, and to die with dignity.
  • We believe in the common moral decencies: altruism, integrity, honesty, truthfulness, responsibility. Humanist ethics is amenable to critical, rational guidance. There are normative standards that we discover together. Moral principles are tested by their consequences.
  • We are deeply concerned with the moral education of our children. We want to nourish reason and compassion.
  • We are engaged by the arts no less than by the sciences.
  • We are citizens of the universe and are excited by discoveries still to be made in the cosmos.
  • We are skeptical of untested claims to knowledge, and we are open to novel ideas and seek new departures in our thinking.
  • We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others.
  • We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality.
  • We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings.
• 

  drew sagan

  For example religion teaches that in the eyes of God homosexuality is wrong.

  Which one? Last time I checked this seemed to be a pretty divided issue amongst 'religion'.
  
  In my own personal opinion I think that in many ways religion play a lot less of a role in society than we somethings think it does. Usually statistics are thrown out there like 85% of Americas identity themselves as Christian or 41% of Americans go to Church every week.
  
  Many though keep faith in God as kind of a safety net in their life to keep them from having to think about death. The entertain the idea, and even identify themselves with a particular religious philosophy. Day to day actions though are more based upon personal morals and standards and are less driven by deeply held religious principles.
  
  While fundamentalism has been really scoring some points in the way of public influence in America, I still don't see it as a good representation of what people are thinking.
• 

  Qcmbr

  Drew - why do you (if you do) maintain a belief in God then? Do you ascribe morals to an external standard of the universe/ of God / of evolution / of culture or of convenience?
• 

  Elsewhere

  All morality is defined by consensus of a population.
• 

  AlanF

  fifi40 said:

  : So is morality a human concept concerned with the principle of not harming others and consent?

  I believe morality is very much such a human concept.

  Even many of the most religious wince at stories like God telling Abraham to kill his son as a sacrifice. They may try to justify such an obvious moral lapse by saying, "Whatever God does is moral", but the very fact that they wince proves they know such justifications are mere rationalizations, because if whatever God does is moral by definition, then morality is arbitrary. But evolution of human social consciousness has built in a sense of morality that is defined, as you say, by awareness that harming others is somehow bad.

  AlanF
• 

  fifi40

  For Drewsagan

  http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chur2.htm

  hope that works :)
• 

  WTWizard

  Yes, morality can exist without God to interfere. And the rules would be simpler and easier for everyone to follow:

  (1) Any volitional act that benefits self or society is moral.

  (2) Any volitional act that harms self or society is immoral.

  (3) Any act that neither harms nor benefits self or society, any act that is forced on us by outside circumstances, and any emotions are all amoral (meaning they are neither good nor bad).

  The rules are simple:

  (1) One must not initiate the use of force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property.

  (2) Force may morally be used in defense against those in violation of the above article.

  Does this sound like we need a Tower to enforce this? If everyone abided by those rules, then society would be perfect. People would work on solving problems like aging and sickness via science, and poverty via business. Eventually, there would be no need for God's kingdom. And, via advancing medical technology, man would ultimately live forever without any Jehovah to tell them what they can and cannot do. Man would automatically do what is best for himself and society because he would reap the reward from doing so. And the reward would be greatest for those creating value, so most people would gravitate toward that. That would solve all our problems. As for the few violators that are too lazy and dishonest, they would be dealt with since rule (2) would allow people to use deadly force in defense.