Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
January 1, 2013
Link

Statistics

Replies: 137

The Religious Have No Morals

:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013
Or, more aptly, do the heavily religious have morals of their own?

One of the main problems with many organized religions is that they come with their own certain set of rules and guidelines, and then expect all of their followers to subscribe to them without question.

More often than not, these morals are not rules that human beings should live by because they're 'right' or 'wrong', but rather because disobeying these rules could mean some sort of cosmic backlash, whether karma or eternal hell-fire or the threefold-rule. With this sort of system, human beings never act based on what's 'right' because they want to, but because they fear punishment for otherwise. This creates an increasingly infantile frame of mind, and can be dangerous to the individual thought.

The question must now be asked, if these morals and rules were not provided within the religion and harshly enforced, what would society be like?

There are two incredible dangers of having one's morals based off of their religion solely:

1) Should the religious structure collapse for whatever reason and these morals or even simply the punishments were taken away, these people would not know what to do with themselves, and

2) The Religious Right teaches the rest of society that without this or that religion, they would become immoral and punishment would be imminent, thus strengthening our dependency on organized religion for structure and preventing further advancement through scientific and social means.

The Religious Right says that humans are amoral by nature, and that humanity needs this or that faith in order to escape punishment. If it is continually allowed for the religious right to enforce this mindset, we will never break away from a government biased by faith to a secular one. This also raises an interesting question:

Without their religion, would the religious have their own morals?

Going a step further, without religion, would they have minds of their own? Why should they be allowed to enforce their views on the rest of the world, if without religion they become thoughtless, amoral zombies?

If we base our laws and standards off of religious means, biblical or otherwise, we are not only robbing the people of their inalienable rights of freedom of religion, we are also becoming dependent on religion to control the ways we live our lives.

If the world's political leaders give way to religious zealots, it affects everyone, regardless of whether or not they follow the religion which is dominant.

This, my friends, creates an abhorrent, outdated society, and it craves change.

Okay, you angry dogs. I've given you your meat. Ready, set, debate.
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Jan 4, 2013
'and then expect all of their followers to subscribe to them without question' False. Many religious systems are quite flexible when it comes to morality.

'With this sort of system, human beings never act based on what's 'right' because they want to, but because they fear punishment for otherwise' people tend to make excuses from thinking. They want an already written, preconstructed moral code, because it's easier than to think about what is right and what is wrong. You mixed up a reason and a result here. People don't forfeit thinking because religion tells them so, people turn to religion because they don't want to think for themselves, they are too lazy for it. So instead, they want someone to tell them what is right and what is wrong.

'Should the religious structure collapse for whatever reason and these morals or even simply the punishments were taken away, these people would not know what to do with themselves' Brought totally out of thin air. Opinion of religious people towards what is 'morally wrong' will remain the same. Only that some of them may not follow it so strictly. But it's not a matter of morality anymore.

'The Religious Right teaches the rest of society that without this or that religion, they would become immoral and punishment would be imminent, thus strengthening our dependency on organized religion for structure and preventing further advancement through scientific and social means. ' Only certain religions, like islam, tends to slow the societies down. Christianity used to do the same, but now it's one of the most modern religions. So you just narrowed everything down to one religion that still acts like an obstacle on the way of progress.

The 3 last lines of your OP is a great description of islamic states. Robbed of freedom of religion, dependence on religion, outdated society and lack of progress. However, there is one factor that you forgot about. It's distinction of religion and public life. In most of developed countries, religions don't play a leading role in creating public opinion, nor do they affect the legal system. You can check out France, Germany, United Kingdom or Japan.
Reply
:iconkaikaku:
kaikaku Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I can't say I agree with many of the assumptions you made in your post. Some of them seem so far off base it hurts my head. X_x

Yeah the heavily religious have morals of their own. To be honest, I don't think I've ever met a single person whose moral system was solely derived from their religion. I do meet plenty who attribute their morality to God or their religion, but I generally do not find that to be the whole story.

Nonetheless, even when religion is a big influence on one's morality, I think most people who believe in God follow the moral system they do because they think it's objectively true, not because they fear punishment (young children are a notable exception to this generalization, though). Anyway, chances are, if they lost their belief in God, they'd still think the moral system was more-or-less true, though they may find themselves questioning parts of it since they no longer have a completely objective source behind it. There are often secular reasons to believe in certain morals or codes of ethical conduct, too, and people adapt.

In short, the generalizations in your post about how religious people will act if their beliefs change do not seem to be in line with how I've seen real people acting when their beliefs change. I don't think religious people are monsters who only hold back from doing things because they fear the consequences. Some might feel like they'd be able to let loose if there were no God, or karma, etc, but in reality they actually have other reasons that they hold back that they never make it far enough to acknowledge.
Reply
:iconperibyss:
Peribyss Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
While I disagree with the way many popular religions promote their moral beliefs, I don't think they'd suddenly lose all of their morals. The collapse of a religion wouldn't be so easily noticeable, it would probably feel exactly like the day before it. While they may know that their religion is "gone" I doubt they'd feel it. Besides, ideas are immortal. Once an idea reaches a certain mass, you will never be rid of it.
Reply
:iconwesmeadow:
Wesmeadow Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Student Digital Artist
Years ago it was the fanatical theist that would be on the forum up on their high horses being assholes, I guess it is skeptics turn.
Reply
:iconkaikaku:
kaikaku Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Out of curiosity, what religion do you think the OP follows?
Reply
:iconwesmeadow:
Wesmeadow Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Student Digital Artist
I would prefer not to get into assuming about the OP.

My comment was over all, as I have read enough atheists and skeptics pick up the "ego mantle" of declaring the religious without real morals.
Reply
:iconsontine:
Sontine Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013   Digital Artist
What about you? Don't you follow a religion or something?
Reply
:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
Sort of. I'm an eclectic Pagan. The difference is I have no set rules or regulations, so I'm free to make it up as I go along.
Reply
:iconsontine:
Sontine Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013   Digital Artist
Hmm. I just think it's a little sad how much you critize the beliefs of other people, when you have beliefs of your own that someone else can find completely absurd.

You know, I'd really like to see that Pagan and Wiccan type people are accepting and tolerant of other religions, but almost every time, it's the same old persecution complex they tend to have, always taunting others to come and argue with them just to prove how ignorant the other religious people are. It really makes them come off as arrogant and prideful. Not saying every last one of them is like that, but many that I've read about are like that.

Also, yes, many of the bigger religions have certain commandments or "rules" to follow. That doesn't mean the followers are just mindless sheep with no morals or thoughts of their own. This is going to sound cliche, but it does take faith and trust to understand things, sometimes things that have nothing to do with religious matters. Like when someone tells me I can get better at art, or I can achieve something that seems out of reach. Does it make me a "mindless zombie" if I try something someone says I should do, even if I don't think it will affect me?

Also, if the world got rid of religion entirely, there'd still be problems; suffering, starvation, greed, wars, murder, rape ect. Animals don't have religion, and they still kill and rape their own kind. If war isn't about religion, it's about someone invading someone's land, or stealing their resources, or some other thing like that.
Reply
:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013
I wasn't criticizing any one belief system, dear. I was criticizing the fact that the most populous faiths don't promote individual thought.

I also never said we should get rid of religion. I said we should get religion out of politics.
Reply
:iconsontine:
Sontine Featured By Owner Jan 4, 2013   Digital Artist
"One of the main problems with many organized religions is that they come with their own certain set of rules and guidelines, and then expect all of their followers to subscribe to them without question."

"...because disobeying these rules could mean some sort of cosmic backlash, whether karma or eternal hell-fire or the threefold-rule."

"...human beings never act based on what's 'right' because they want to, but because they fear punishment for otherwise. This creates an increasingly infantile frame of mind, and can be dangerous to the individual thought."

Sorry, but the first few paragraphs seemed to imply that religion is bad, evil, and harmful to peoples' minds.

Well, other than that, I agree that religion should stay out of politics.
Reply
:iconunclegargy:
UncleGargy Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
It seems that religion exists solely to control the ignorant masses who can't think for themselves.
Reply
:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
Which would be almost a good thing, if religions weren't so outdated and obnoxious.
Reply
:iconmacker33:
macker33 Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
Know the difference between a scruple and a moral?
Reply
:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
Oh, look. You still exist.
Reply
:iconmacker33:
macker33 Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
yeah, and nothings changed
Reply
:icondragonflae:
Dragonflae Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013
So your comment is in vain. Now shoo.
Reply
:iconcarusmm:
carusmm Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Name me one religious country that isn't a basketcase.
Reply
:iconwitwitch:
witwitch Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student Writer
Is Finland a basket case? I don't really think so.

We don't have separation of church and State here. There's a church tax if you belong to a church, and the church is legally responsible for the care of the country's graveyards and processing marriage/death certificate type paperwork. It's one of the few things about this country I don't like.

(Despite this, Finland has civil unions for gays.)
Reply
:iconkillianseraphim:
KillianSeraphim Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student General Artist
Japan, to some degree.
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student General Artist
I think a large majority of them are Buddhist but a lot of Japanese sees Buddhist as a form of lifestyle not a relgion.
Reply
:iconkillianseraphim:
KillianSeraphim Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student General Artist
That's why I stated "to a degree". In truth, Shinto, however, was there before Buddhism, and, though not recognized as a religion, it's become a part of their culture.
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student General Artist
Yep True.
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Student General Artist
Majority of Japan are Atheist or acknowledged agnostic
Reply
:icontinoculars:
Tinoculars Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Professional Interface Designer
[link] godless mofos :iconstaresplz:
Reply
:icontinoculars:
Tinoculars Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Professional Interface Designer
Japan isn't the best advert for atheism: [link]
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Student General Artist
I never said it was :lol:
I know Japan is far from perfect through I still prefer to live there then the heavily Islamic country Yemen where I would be stoned for being gay.
Reply
:icontinoculars:
Tinoculars Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Professional Interface Designer
Are you gay?
Reply
:iconkell0x:
Kell0x Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Student General Artist
Yes.

Or else I wouldn't make that comment. : p
Reply
:icontinoculars:
Tinoculars Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Professional Interface Designer
Ah, you are lucky not to live in Taliban then. But then again I guess anyone who isn't a straight muslim man is lucky not to live in Taliban.
Reply
:iconbullet-magnet:
Bullet-Magnet Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013
Most of us get most of our morals the same way. The difference is to what we attribute them.

Your argument begins by accepting the proposition that the religious get their morality from their religion. I agree that it would be horrifying if this were the case. I don't think it is.
Reply
:iconrunespainter:
RunesPainter Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
The morals I know that the Bible provided are morals everyone should have. Thou shalt not kill...thou shalt no commit adultery...thou shalt not covet they neighbors goods...thou shalt not steal...honour thy father and thy mother. These are but a few "moral rules" taken from the Ten Commandments. Are they so awful? Now, I understand that there are very judgmental religious people who scorn anyone who doesn't live by their morals. They miss the point. Rather than scorn people for it, show them love. There are many hypocritical/lost religious people in this world, and I'm sorry that it upsets you, but don't blame the texts; it's the people's doing.
Reply
:icontimehasanend:
TimeHasAnEnd Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist
Because, there's no perfect religions, that are in the world today. That's why God says, that we are only to trust and believe the "Word of God of the Bible." "Entirely alone! Because, the Bible is the "Law Book of God" and every words, that are written therein came from the mouth of God, not men. Wherefore, the Bible was written for mankind to follow and obey them. So, therefore, religion is not the blame. It's within yourself, who first to be blame. Because, God predicted, that religion or non-religion who doesn't obey God's law, will become apostate in hearing the truth. For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; unless at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart......"Therefore, God says, blessed are your eyes, for they see the truth and your ears for they can hear. But, to those who doesn't want to hear the truth, let their eyes and ears be shut from the truth. Wherefore, by hearing you shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing you shall see, and shall not perceive."
Reply
:iconbullet-magnet:
Bullet-Magnet Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013
Covering their arses, eh?
Reply
:icontimehasanend:
TimeHasAnEnd Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist
My statment doesn't cover for anyone. You missed the point.
Reply
:iconbullet-magnet:
Bullet-Magnet Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
It does. Even those who don't believe that religion is bullshit can be sufficiently self-aware to recognise that it looks very much like bullshit. It does not require divine inspiration to realise that a lot of people are going to come to that unavoidable conclusion. But apparently if you point out that very obvious fact in advance, that impresses some people. The kind that like to flaunt the quotes that say as much, as though it were either impressive or interesting.

It reminds me of those very common scenes in film and television, where the villain has disguised themselves in the identity of one of the protagonists, and runs to the protagonist's allies to warn them that the bad guy has stolen their identity, and to watch out. then the real protagonist turns up and everyone believes that he is actually the bad guy for no other reason than that that was the accusation they heard first. They protest, "I'm the real hero! That's the villain!"
"That's exactly what the hero said you would say, villain," they reply. Because they're gullible idiots that believe the first thing they hear. It's sloppy writing, but distressingly believable.

And it's exactly what I hear when that quote about non-believers come up. "Bullshit, you say? That's exactly what the bible said you would say, you foolish heathen!" Well golly, I'm not surprised that it would, but I don't find such pre-empting to be very profound, and neither should you. It only requires as much intelligence to come up with it as it does to be impressed by it, ie not very much, and it does nothing to demonstrate the truth of the broader claims that it seeks to defend.
Reply
:iconreesewhyte:
reesewhyte Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013   Digital Artist
Yes. Just...yes.
Reply
:iconsmkiller:
Smkiller Featured By Owner Jan 3, 2013  Hobbyist
This has got to be one of the best posts I've read these forums thus far.
Reply
:icondotb18:
DOTB18 Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
:iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz::iconclapplz:
Reply
:iconsaeter:
Saeter Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
That was bloody brilliant!
Reply
:iconcrimsonmagpie:
CrimsonMagpie Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
Careful, you're slipping out of character!
Reply
:icondidj:
Didj Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
:iconohsnap-plz:
Reply
:iconcrimsonmagpie:
CrimsonMagpie Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013  Professional Traditional Artist
So it was you all along! :noes:
Reply
:icondidj:
Didj Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
Oh sweet and salty Jesus crackers, no. I'm not TimeHasAnEnd. Though, if I was, that would have been indeed the most elaborate troll on the forums ever achieved. To spend an entire year acting as a lunatic fundamentalist, argue with myself, block myself from myself, send passive aggressive forum posts to myself. But no. I honestly think that the Talking Bible is for reals crazy fundie.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconrunespainter:
RunesPainter Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
The text in the Bible before Christ's time was the word of God before He decided to send down His Son and offer forgiveness to all. People neglect to see that when they throw out complaints toward the Bible and Christianity.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Really?:

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)


All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)


But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)


If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
Reply
:icontimehasanend:
TimeHasAnEnd Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist
Remember, the Old Testment law is not forgotten. Only, mankind, who dare to change the truth and turn God into lies. Yes, if mankind would have stick to old testament, perhaps all this adulterers, fornicators, killing, rapist, murderer, would have been stop long time ago. But, no...,mankind want to get away with it. That's why wickedness plunged into the whole world and they have multiply, like wild fire all over the world. (i.e) Our children, has gone away astrays, killing innocents 20 people, including their parents and little kids. Adulterers and fornications is everywhere, no wonder we have so many single parents, that are suffering and they have abondan their kids. Because, their continous and rebellion against the "Law of God, the Bible." That's why marriages today are doomed, because they have violated their marriages.
Reply
:icondivine--apathia:
divine--apathia Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
If you stuck to the old testament, You'd be right, there would be known of them... because we'd all be dead. because it's a-okay to kill innocents in the old testement, especially children. God just loves killing innocent children because of their parents sins.

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, (Jeremiah 51:20-26)

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)
Reply
:icontimehasanend:
TimeHasAnEnd Featured By Owner Jan 1, 2013  Hobbyist
No, Moses didn't allowed them to kill an innocent men or women. They have to come up with proof and evidence, that they are guilty. So, you're argument is disputed.
Reply
:iconsaeter:
Saeter Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2013
Thats contradicting the bible. Your interpreting it to support your beliefs as it's quite clear that Moses or a character that was incorporated into Moses had said so it's in the bible. Didn't he also commit murder himself but I guess he got a pass because it was an egyptian and before the commandments?
Reply
Add a Comment: