• In total there are 57 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 56 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 1086 on Mon Jul 01, 2024 9:03 am

Religion as a bar to immorality

Engage in conversations about worldwide religions, cults, philosophy, atheism, freethought, critical thinking, and skepticism in this forum.
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.

All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

This is bleed over from a discussion here:

http://www.booktalk.org/post100971.html

On page 9.

Ant:
We can see, across history, consequences related to "godless" States. How inflexible were these non religious individuals: Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pot
Moral absolutes would have perhaps prevented the horrors related to the aforementioned amoral monsters. There are irrational religious and non religious people.
Slippery slopes are, and always will be unavoidable terrain in need of negotiation. Christ's doctrines of love, charity, etc are more than reasonable starting points when considering morality. Naturally, you as my neighbor no longer have oxen or an ass in your driveway to covet. If I covet your SUV and steal it, the bible and the law considers it immoral and an affront to society.
This is cherry picking, Ant.

Godless states… like Sweden?

http://www.gadling.com/2007/08/23/least ... countries/

Stalin, Hitler, Mao and the others are the figure heads of state religions in a basic form. They were the cult of personality, and they, like your god, would have no god before themselves, so they tried to purge religion. Why? Because they wanted that fanatical zeal for themselves.

Loving Jesus meant not loving the beloved leader. Meant not looking to the state to put meaning in their lives. They may have been atheist, but they were not irreligious. It’s just that the focus of that unquestioning, un-flinching, devotion was transferred from an incorporeal god to a flesh and bone god-king.

And besides, Hitler was no atheist.

I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.

- Adolf Hitler, to General Gerhard Engel, 1941


By its decision to carry out the political and moral cleansing of our public life, the Government is creating and securing the conditions for a really deep and inner religious life. The advantages for the individual which may be derived from compromises with atheistic organizations do not compare in any way with the consequences which are visible in the destruction of our common religious and ethical values. The national Government sees in both Christian denominations the most important factor for the maintenance of our society. ...

- Adolf Hitler, speech before the Reichstag, March 23, 1933, just before the Enabling Act is passed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_A ... abling_Act


Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith ...we need believing people.

- Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933, speech made during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordant


We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.

- Adolf Hitler, Speech in Berlin, October 24, 1933

"In Freethinkers Hall, which before the Nazi resurgence was the national headquarters of the German Freethinkers League, the Berlin Protestant church authorities have opened a bureau for advice to the public in church matters. Its chief object is to win back former churchgoers and assist those who have not previously belonged to any religious congregation in obtaining church membership. The German Freethinkers League, which was swept away by the national revolution, was the largest of such organizations in Germany. It had about 500,000 members..."



- The New York Times, May 14, 1933, page 2, on Hitler's outlawing atheistic and freethinking groups in the Spring of 1933, after the Enabling Act authorizing Hitler to rule by decree


"We demand freedom for all religious confessions in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or conflict with the customs and moral sentiments of the Germanic race. The party as such represents the standpoint of a positive Christianity, without owing itself to a particular confession...."


- Article 20 of the program of the German Workers' Party (later named the National Socialist German Workers' Party, NSDAP)

I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 2

What we have to fight for is the necessary security for the existence and increase of our race and people, the subsistence of its children and the maintenance of our racial stock unmixed, the freedom and independence of the Fatherland; so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the Creator.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 8

But if out of smugness, or even cowardice, this battle is not fought to its end, then take a look at the peoples five hundred years from now. I think you will find but few images of God, unless you want to profane the Almighty.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 10

Anyone who dares to lay hands on the highest image of the Lord commits sacrilege against the benevolent creator of this miracle and contributes to the expulsion from paradise.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Vol. 2 Chapter 1

It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god.

- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Vol. 2 Chapter 2

Hitler was religious.

That isn't different really, than saying that so and so was an atheist. What does that have to do with it?

To the degree in which somebody finds their status in some group to be motivation to do something, then it becomes important.

What atheist is killing in the name of atheism?

Who kills in the name of god?.... take your pick.

Now, Atheism is simply a digital response to the question, believe in god? No. But when religious people say “atheism” they are usually talking about empirical rationalists.

Were the Nazis guilty of being too questioning of authority? Were they too meshed with critical thinking? Were they guilty of letting the facts take precedent over their biased dogma? Was that their problem? Or was it that they came to irrational conclusions, independent of evidence, facts, and immune to rational discourse so that they could continue to believe what they wanted to believe no matter what it cost anyone.


Being religious doesn’t cause immoral behavior, but it is no check on it.

Religion has never been a bar to the commission of atrocities. By some counts there were upwards of twenty million native Americans here before the highly religious, preacher-in-tow, conquistadors slaughtered not just whole populations, but wiped cultures off the map entirely.

Something which is not in disagreement with the bible, by the way.
“As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.” ---- Deuteronomy 20:10-14
And that is exactly what they did. They showed up, said we are better than you, you will be our property, to do with as we want, or you will all be slaughtered on the spot, and we’ll rape and pillage and burn to our hearts content in any case.


Being religious didn’t stop Europeans from uprooting native Americans, stealing their land, giving them small-pox blankets and sending them on a march of death across the continent. Being religious didn’t prevent the exploitation, rape, murder, and enslavement of Africans either.

By the millions.


What about the crusades, the inquisition, and the witch slaughters, all done specifically in the name of god?

Why do we know and rightfully hate the names of Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Pot, but not the names of the monsters who convicted and murdered witches? Mass murder was being committed out of the raving madness of religious hysteria. Between 40,000 and 60,000 people were executed (read, tortured, maimed, forced to indicate other innocent people then usually burned at the stake, followed by the same treatment for those unlucky enough to be named.) Whole villages, hundreds of people, were exterminated in this way.

What exactly are you saying? Being religious prevents immoral behavior? That doesn’t hold up at all.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
User avatar
Interbane

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 7203
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
19
Location: Da U.P.
Has thanked: 1105 times
Been thanked: 2166 times
United States of America

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Moral absolutes would have perhaps prevented the horrors related to the aforementioned amoral monsters.
Moral absolutes have failed to keep people from being immoral/amoral all across history. It doesn't really matter whether or not Hitler was religious or atheistic, because there will be people that deviate from the morals they are taught regardless of what moral system that is. The moral compass used by the tyrants ant mentioned, what is that compass? Atheism isn't a moral system, it's merely the lack of belief in a god. What most people think of as atheistic morality is instead some form of secular ethics. Humanist Manifestos can be found in various US institutions, which is remarkable considering our collective religiosity. The Girl Scouts, West Point, Rotary, and the Naval Academy to name a few.

You could have an ethical system based off authority and centered around "do unto others...", but what if you have skepticism regarding the authority? What else is there to keep you loyal to this rule? Secular ethics is able to be understood, and is based off reasoning rather than authority. The enforcement comes from within, rather than from an outside agency. Some forms of secular ethics are in the same vein as religion, a previous rung on the ladder of increasing moral understanding. Utilitarianism, Objectivism(Rand), and Deontological ethics are some examples.

Most people think the moral relativism that results from non-religious morals is due to the fact that they are thought up by men. But the morals within the bible are thought up by men as well. For example, the most important rule and I think a necessary axiom for any worthwhile ethical system is the golden rule "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." Often attributed to Jesus, since he mentions it in Matthew, the phrase can actually be found long before the bible was written, before Jesus was born, from Hindu and Buddhist texts to various Roman and Greek philosophers. Even this "golden rule" can be improved to what some would call the "platinum rule", because it's possible to live by the golden rule yet unintentionally treat someone in a way they don't want to be treated.

It is inevitable that we'd see this rule arise at some point in history, since it carries an almost mathematical imperative. If you understand that you are one amongst many, and that anything you do can be duplicated by any other member back to yourself, you will (hopefully) come to the conclusion that the only sustainable way to live is to "Do unto others...". You do not need to take this rule on authority, you can champion it based on a full understanding of why it's good for humanity and for yourself.

We do not need to take our morals from a make-believe authority. They are able to be anchored more strongly if they are based on reasoning, and understood, rather than accepted on faith. The benefit of this is when you find a situation where your moral code becomes unreasonable(immoral/amoral), you are not "locked" into obeying it. If a murdering rapist is attacking your wife after handcuffing you to your desk where a gun is strapped underneath, would you refrain from killing the murderer because "thou shalt not kill"? Or would you wade the murky depths of religious writings in your memory in search of a passage that permits you to shoot the man without the fear of going to hell? We all have something of a moral intuition, although it must be guided(even religion must be taught).
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
User avatar
President Camacho

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I Should Be Bronzed
Posts: 1655
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:44 pm
16
Location: Hampton, Ga
Has thanked: 246 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Hey, I'm trolling. Delete if necessary.

I'd like to know what you guys think (Johns, Inter) of Hobbes' "Of Religion". I think you may get a kick out of it. It's pretty short.

Click and scroll down to where it starts.

http://www.booktalk.org/hobbesian-relig ... 12062.html
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
13
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Hi Johnson,

Thanks for bleeding the topic over here.
I'll respond later today. I've been really busy. :(

Everyone has had outstanding input. There are some very knowledgeable people here.
User avatar
johnson1010
Tenured Professor
Posts: 3564
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:35 pm
15
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1280 times
Been thanked: 1128 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Agreed interbane.

It is really a case of what works vs. what doesn't. As soon as we aknowledge that it is advantageous for organisms to cooperate then we have the basis of morality.

Keeping your helpers alive and happy means more success for everybody, and just like that, you have a biological root for cooperation.
In the absence of God, I found Man.
-Guillermo Del Torro

Are you pushing your own short comings on us and safely hating them from a distance?

Is this the virtue of faith? To never change your mind: especially when you should?

Young Earth Creationists take offense at the idea that we have a common heritage with other animals. Why is being the descendant of a mud golem any better?
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
13
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

This is cherry picking, Ant.
Both sides are cherry picking here, Johnson. Segments of historicities that exemplify a particular point of view are ripe for cherry picking. I don't deny that, and neither should anyone who utilizes history in such a manner.
I do not turn away from historical events that were the stage of horrible crimes against groups of people (i.e. Crusades). Nor do I overlook chapters of history that exemplify the slaughter of innocents committed by individuals with no religious affiliations (we must call these people, by definition, atheists) The entire historical record is peppered with atrocities committed by both camps. You can not cherry pick the Crusades and proclaim that because of this event, religion is a poisonous stain on humanity. Quite frankly, events like these must be categorized as extreme examples of institutions gone amok. Just the same, we also must categorize the reigns of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler to be extreme examples of political ideologies gone amok.


Hitler was religious.
That assertion is rich for debate. One only needs to do a little research to discover this.
Honestly, one's own confirmation bias would exclude counter evidence in relation to Hitler's true feeling on religion. I will leave that for the more venturous minds.
But when religious people say “atheism” they are usually talking about empirical rationalists.
But when atheist people say "religious" they are usually talking about zealots
Were the Nazis guilty of being too questioning of authority? Were they too meshed with critical thinking? Were they guilty of letting the facts take precedent over their biased dogma? Was that their problem?
The Nazi's were guilty of taking an ubermensch complex to the extreme. They were overly critical to a murderous degree. Such an imbalance is deadly for believers and non-believers alike.
Being religious doesn’t cause immoral behavior, but it is no check on it.
There are many that have converted from a life of crime, because of religion, that would dispute this claim. This is a good thing, yes?

What exactly are you saying? Being religious prevents immoral behavior?
I am not one to make such a claim. To do so would be foolish.

This is all just finger pointing, with extremities provided as a source of "evidence."
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
13
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Keeping your helpers alive and happy means more success for everybody, and just like that, you have a biological root for cooperation.
[/quote]

This does not explain altruistic behavior that runs much deeper.
Someone sends money to feed starving children in Ethiopia.
What is the biological advantage for the person that wrote the check?
Does this keep his "selfish genes" alive?

Science can root out shallow explanations for morality, not deeper ones.
User avatar
realiz

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
Amazingly Intelligent
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 12:31 pm
15
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

This does not explain altruistic behavior that runs much deeper.
Someone sends money to feed starving children in Ethiopia.
The fact that we can know about starving children in Ethiopia is a pretty recent event as far as evolution goes. How do we motivate people to send this money? By showing pictures of suffering children (usually cute). There is a biological advantage to caring about children even if they are not your own.
User avatar
ant

1G - SILVER CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 5935
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 12:04 pm
13
Has thanked: 1371 times
Been thanked: 969 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

realiz wrote:
This does not explain altruistic behavior that runs much deeper.
Someone sends money to feed starving children in Ethiopia.
The fact that we can know about starving children in Ethiopia is a pretty recent event as far as evolution goes. How do we motivate people to send this money? By showing pictures of suffering children (usually cute). There is a biological advantage to caring about children even if they are not your own.

Sorry, but that was no explanation.
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: Religion as a bar to immorality

Unread post

Are we talking about morality as avoiding doing bad things or as doing positive acts for other people? I think it makes a difference. My guess is that having a religious affiliation makes no difference when it comes to avoiding acts that harm others. Social bonds do a good job of ensuring avoidance of harm, though it should be said that these bonds can be weak or strong, so that people are more likely to do bad things when there is social pathology.

Some cultures have stronger traditions of helping those in need than others do. Would increased activism of this sort correlate with greater participation in religion? I don't know, maybe. Religion implies a discipline of sorts and also involves working in association with others in the group to express the belief that to help others is good. Religions provide manpower and organization directed toward a goal, that unaffiliated individuals wouldn't likely be able to match. Civic groups can do the same helping things that religious groups can, of course. We'd have to have some way of calculating which has the greater positive effect.

When Barack Obama was a community organizer in Chicago, the only way he could become involved in the life of the community was through the churches in the area. That suggests in many places in the U.S., what there is of civic life is based in the churches.
Post Reply

Return to “Religion & Philosophy”