For Goodness' Sake

and annoying.

I was thinking back to a Philosophy of God course I took a semester or two back, and one of the main criticisms against atheists is that they are a godless (that kinda goes with the territory though) and immoral lot. At the time of that course I was still struggling through my thoughts on religion (against it in most cases) and god (if pushed, I lean towards deism). But even then, I thought this was an incredibly asinine statement, of course atheists can be moral-- in fact there is an argument to be made that they have the potential to be "more" moral than their Christian counterparts, which is not to say that Christians can't be moral.

One of first results when searching "morality"
why? Because monkey in a suit, with a gun that's why

Many of the people in that Philosophy class felt that without God, mankind had no basis for morality. Fortunately, I was not the only one to point out the silliness of the claim. You can derive morals from many paths other than religion; empathy, reciprocity (the golden rule, basically), and sympathy. I laid out the argument like this 1) I like to do good things because they make me feel good 2) I like to do good things because I want other people to do good things to me 3) I like to do good things because it makes others feel good.  Now that may not be the most comprehensive explanation in the world, but I feel that it sufficed for the purposes of that class. 

Put in cynical terms,
be nice so that you don't get blown up?

One question that was never satisfactorily answered in that class was, why morality derived from fear of divine punishment more "moral" than one derived from empathy. If your only reason for being moral is that your God told you to do so (on fear of damnation), then there are two implications. First, you are relying upon a text that has been edited, and translated in any number of possibly erroneous ways, as a guide for your life. Assuming you've read the whole thing, then you run into problems of selectivity. Why do Christians eat shellfish, but claim that premarital sex is wrong? Both are "sins" in the Bible, and yet one is ignored. Furthermore, if you haven't read the Bible (and this is pretty common:  http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2010/0928/In-US-atheists-know-religion-better-than-believers.-Is-that-bad) then you rely upon the Church, or some other worldly authority. Relying upon someone else to tell you how to live your life seems quite at odds with the claim that you believe in the word of God. What if your church/priest/pastor/pope is wrong?

He does have a very big hat though

The second issue is that you are good only because you fear damnation. I realize that this does not hold true for all (or maybe even most) Christians, but the implied message is still there. Don't sin because if you do, then God will send you to Hell. The concept of hell is irreconcilable to me with the concept of a benevolent god. I raised this issue many times as a kid; why would god send people to hell just because they're not Christian? Why would god send anyone to hell for any reason (falling short of truly heinous things such as rape)? Don't get me wrong though, I know many Christians who are paragons of morality. I also know many atheists/deists/whatever else who are just as moral. One point that I maintain though, is that most Christians I know do not in fact adhere to the Bible 100% because they do things like mix cloths  (Deuteronomy 22:1), get haircuts ( Leviticus 19:27 ), and let women speak in church (1 Corinthians 14:34). I bring up that last verse because a lot of people I talk to claim that the Old Testament isn't as important as the new, but as far as I know, Corinthians is in the New Testament. 

this is a pun

My point is, it shouldn't matter what you believe so long as you try and be a decent person. I don't care what you believe so long as you're not an asshole.