|
chatterbox24 -> RE: What good is morality anyway? (3/28/2014 9:46:27 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GeekyCouplePHX
Atheists do NOT state that the absence of sin is more important, mainly because the concept of 'SIN' is largely an abrahamic religious one. Native american, polynesian, and other non judeo-christian religions do not have 'sins' within their doctrine.
Atheists are much more concerned with morality than the approval of an invisible sky-father. Actions that your religion (assuming you are Xtian) mark as sinful may not be immoral at all, like eating pork, or wearing clothing made from more than one type of thread. Other actions that the bible claim are moral and righteous, like selling your daughters into slavery, or beating your spouse to death, are considered immoral and wrong by many atheists (and others). The mere fact that millions of christians choose not to stone people to death for some sins is an admittance that their morality and their religion's laws regarding sin aren't aligned, that there are things that the bible tells christians that they must do that are obviously horrific and barbaric, regardless of the fact that they are approved by God himself, via the authors of the bible.
Without a religion to guide us, many atheists subscribe to the concept that our actions should cause no (Unconsensual) suffering in ourselves or others. If what you are doing causes suffering, then it is wrong. If your actions reduce suffering, then they are laudable. Actions that cause the least suffering are more moral than those that cause more; those that cause the least suffering, or reduce the most suffering are superior to those that do not. If you want a more nuanced version of this concept, look up Sam Harris on youtube (http://bit.ly/1myqtBI); he makes the best argument that morality can be determined logically, without any religious doctrine at all.
Thank you for your contribution to the thread. Gives one a better perspective.
|
|
|
|
