ChatterBank3 mins ago
Moral decline
89 Answers
First of all, apologies if this is not quite in the right category. I've been "lurking" on this site for quite some time now and find the argument/discussion between theist and atheist interesting and often quite amusing. I am a confirmed atheist, having walked out of C of E confirmation classes some fifty years ago, so I align myself with the "usual suspects" (I will admit to have a sneaking respect for some contributors who "appear" to have such an unshakeable faith in a collection of mistranslated fairy stories!).
My problem is that I am becoming increasingly concerned about the moral decline in our society and find myself wishing the established church would accept it's role and take more of a moral stand to help reverse some of the outrageous imbalance that just seems to be getting worse. This makes me feel a bit of a hypocrite, but in the absence of any other acceptable role models where else should we be looking? Probably not politicians!!
My problem is that I am becoming increasingly concerned about the moral decline in our society and find myself wishing the established church would accept it's role and take more of a moral stand to help reverse some of the outrageous imbalance that just seems to be getting worse. This makes me feel a bit of a hypocrite, but in the absence of any other acceptable role models where else should we be looking? Probably not politicians!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jason.p. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Gran, //Why don't you atheists, who know all but do nowt, do something about the moral decline. //
What makes you think non-believers do nothing? I'm willing to bet that many of us instil rather high moralistic values into our children because we teach them that they must be responsible for their own actions. The Devil is not the cause of their misdemeanours - there is no 'get out' clause.
What makes you think non-believers do nothing? I'm willing to bet that many of us instil rather high moralistic values into our children because we teach them that they must be responsible for their own actions. The Devil is not the cause of their misdemeanours - there is no 'get out' clause.
The OP seems to be relying heavily on the fact that the Christian Church is really worth thinking about, the fact that our religious leaders are not drumming up trade is worrying. He professes to be an atheist but turns to the Church to solve the problem. You may teach your children, naomi, we all profess to do that to the best of our ability, but believe me there are some Godless people out there. There is a lack of moral fibre among the young. They have no direction. We attended Church we had a community and we belonged, we had a reason to follow a faith just as muslim and jews do.
Having a faith and enjoying the spirit of giving and having a purpose is a start. The parents should show by example, and that is where the problem lies. Religion has been put on the back-burner and it's time more young people attended Church. I'm not a do-gooder but I can see where all the apathy started. Go and stand outside Finsbury Park Mosque and tell them there is no God. Off to bed. goodnight.
Having a faith and enjoying the spirit of giving and having a purpose is a start. The parents should show by example, and that is where the problem lies. Religion has been put on the back-burner and it's time more young people attended Church. I'm not a do-gooder but I can see where all the apathy started. Go and stand outside Finsbury Park Mosque and tell them there is no God. Off to bed. goodnight.
atalanta //Why don't we campaign for morals/ethics/philosophy to be taught in schools in place of religion ?//
This has happened in the Government Education system in New South Wales, Australia. Those who don't want their children to attend religious education are offerred the Ethics class instead. It has been very popular, so popular that some religious groups have been actively campaigning to stop it.
This has happened in the Government Education system in New South Wales, Australia. Those who don't want their children to attend religious education are offerred the Ethics class instead. It has been very popular, so popular that some religious groups have been actively campaigning to stop it.
Gran, // we had a reason to follow a faith just as muslim and jews do. .......Go and stand outside Finsbury Park Mosque and tell them there is no God.//
Do you realise what you've said? You extol the virtues of religious communities and then imply that if I tell the people at Finsbury Park Mosque I don't believe there is a God, I will be in physical danger. And that's to be admired and emulated? Why?
Religion doesn't remove the inclination to commit immoral acts - it attempts to prevent immorality by the indoctrination of guilt, fear, and the threat of eternal punishment - and that, in my book, is immoral in itself, because it isn't education - it's mental abuse.
You say 'there are some Godless people out there', as though that is a bad thing. Why is it bad? Is my code of ethics any less than yours? Do I take my parental responsibilities any lighter than you? Do I care for my fellow man any less than you? No. In fact devoid of a constant selfish personal obsession with the eventual fate of my 'soul', I would guess I think far less about 'me' than you think about 'you'. Nevertheless, unlike the thinking non-believer, you overlook the principle and appear to assume some sort of divine right to criticise the 'Godless' on a personal level - and you clearly judge them to be something rather less than you - as, it seems, do most people of religion. I find it very sad indeed that religion weakens the intellect to such an extent that grown people feel that they're unable to live a decent life, or to raise their children to be responsible human beings, without other people, who rely upon ancient books full of demonstrable errors, to guide them. Education is the key - but the religious aren't the people we should call upon because they do not educate - they control - and they control by devious means.
Do you realise what you've said? You extol the virtues of religious communities and then imply that if I tell the people at Finsbury Park Mosque I don't believe there is a God, I will be in physical danger. And that's to be admired and emulated? Why?
Religion doesn't remove the inclination to commit immoral acts - it attempts to prevent immorality by the indoctrination of guilt, fear, and the threat of eternal punishment - and that, in my book, is immoral in itself, because it isn't education - it's mental abuse.
You say 'there are some Godless people out there', as though that is a bad thing. Why is it bad? Is my code of ethics any less than yours? Do I take my parental responsibilities any lighter than you? Do I care for my fellow man any less than you? No. In fact devoid of a constant selfish personal obsession with the eventual fate of my 'soul', I would guess I think far less about 'me' than you think about 'you'. Nevertheless, unlike the thinking non-believer, you overlook the principle and appear to assume some sort of divine right to criticise the 'Godless' on a personal level - and you clearly judge them to be something rather less than you - as, it seems, do most people of religion. I find it very sad indeed that religion weakens the intellect to such an extent that grown people feel that they're unable to live a decent life, or to raise their children to be responsible human beings, without other people, who rely upon ancient books full of demonstrable errors, to guide them. Education is the key - but the religious aren't the people we should call upon because they do not educate - they control - and they control by devious means.
Can anyone enjoy true peace with his neighbours or real security if there is no holding to true standards of morality? Obviously not. Without this there will be lying, stealing, adultery, and similar practices. Genuine love of neighbour should promote morality. As the Bible expresses it:
“He that loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. For the law code, ‘You must not commit adultery, You must not murder, You must not steal, You must not covet,’ and whatever other commandment there is, is summed up in this word, namely, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does not work evil to one’s neighbour; therefore love is the law’s fulfillment.”—Romans 13:8-10.
More important than this, however, do you believe that anyone can be at peace with God, having the assurance of His favor and protection, if he does not practice true morality? Could you respect and honour God if he did not require such morality from those whom he approves?
Surely for God to require righteousness he would have to make clear to his creatures what his moral standards are. To say that each person should make up his own standards and go by them would be no more reasonable than to say that each person should make up his own traffic laws and go by them. You know what the result would be. The Bible logically shows that there is only one way bringing God’s approval and that any other road leads only to destruction.—Matthew 7:13, 14.
“He that loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. For the law code, ‘You must not commit adultery, You must not murder, You must not steal, You must not covet,’ and whatever other commandment there is, is summed up in this word, namely, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does not work evil to one’s neighbour; therefore love is the law’s fulfillment.”—Romans 13:8-10.
More important than this, however, do you believe that anyone can be at peace with God, having the assurance of His favor and protection, if he does not practice true morality? Could you respect and honour God if he did not require such morality from those whom he approves?
Surely for God to require righteousness he would have to make clear to his creatures what his moral standards are. To say that each person should make up his own standards and go by them would be no more reasonable than to say that each person should make up his own traffic laws and go by them. You know what the result would be. The Bible logically shows that there is only one way bringing God’s approval and that any other road leads only to destruction.—Matthew 7:13, 14.
Elderman >>Can anyone enjoy true peace with his neighbours or real security if there is no holding to true standards of morality? Obviously not. Without this there will be lying, stealing, adultery, and similar practices. Genuine love of neighbour should promote morality. As the Bible expresses it:<<
The Bible can express it as much as it like but morality was around long before Christianity, you just cant accept it in your tiny little mind!!
The Bible can express it as much as it like but morality was around long before Christianity, you just cant accept it in your tiny little mind!!
I don't think the church or it's Biblical morality has any place in modern society.
"The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre, but we are not bound by any of it because it was put together by crude, uncultured human mammals"
Christopher Hitchens.
Is this the moral code to which we should all subscribe?
"The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre, but we are not bound by any of it because it was put together by crude, uncultured human mammals"
Christopher Hitchens.
Is this the moral code to which we should all subscribe?
As is often the case in such instances, people turned to religion to find comfort and explanations. On the day of the massacre, an ecumenical religious service was held. Many appreciated the support. But those looking for comfort from God’s Word or for answers to their perplexing questions were sadly disappointed.
Naomi what gives you the divine right to criticise people who have a faith in and belief in a religion. At least you realise that the Finsbury Park inhabitants will be less patient than us with your continuing diatribe on here. My response was to the OP who as a confirmed atheist is becoming 'increasingly concerned' enough to wish the Church which 'in the absence of any acceptable role models' could help to stop the moral decline. The fact is that people who are part of a group are more likely to follow suit and learn the ways of right and wrong. Teaching does not have to follow the Bible in the way that it is set out in the Bible or Koran, and the question of abuse is inane. Religion or belief in something is not control if you willingly wish to learn the lessons in a bid to become a better person. It is very sad that you believe that religion somehow weakens the intellect. It does not, you are blinkered by the idea that someone is looking at a bible - or an old incomplete book and taking the reading verbatim, that there can be no other interpretation, and you are incredulous that anyone could believe it refers to a man on a cloud with a big book writing down everyones sins. There being no other force to reckon with. How naive. How do you know?
Gran- I don't care if you are an atheist, a Christian, a Muslim, a Pagan, whatever you choose to be, that's your business, and if if having your faith comforts you then all good, but I do care when you imply, no not even imply but state as if it were a fact, that people who are ' Godless' or of a different faith automatically lack in some way a moral code.
''The fact is that people who are part of a group are more likely to follow suit and learn the ways of right and wrong.''- what the hell gives you that impression? You also seem to forget that we are all part of a group anyway- society is the largest group there is, and I welcome all the colour and diversity that ours lends, and the lessons that it teaches us in terms of tolerence and respect without the pinput of anyone's mythical superbeing who rules by fear. 10,000 years in the fiery abyss anyone, if you've got doubts as to his existence?
The question of abuse in the church is not ' inane', you clearly have never suffered by it, but those of us who have ( I finally plucked up courage to tell our priest that my father beat me half to death most days and to ask for help- and the priest dragged me home and told my father what I'd said- the resulting beating left me with a permanent brain injury)- and there were those far worse off than I who were beaten, raped and tortured by the church in Ireland and further afield- so I'd appreciate it if you'd show some knowledge of the 'right and wrong' you reckon the church has given you and not post disrespectful drivel about their suffering being ' inane' or unworthy of discussion here.
I was brought up where religion was everything, p[eople died every day because they were not the right religion or because they showed compassion to those of another faith, and I grew up to be full of hatred and violence with no respect for anyone or anything. It took meeting my wife before any of that changed and I am happy to say that my children are 100% better people than I could have ever hoped to be because they WEREN'T brought up surrounded by religious dogma. They are not directionless or 'lacking in moral fibre' as you so high handedly put it and niether are the vast majority of kids these days. They don't need religion to teach them to be good people they need sound political leaders to enable them to be the very best people they can be without fears of unemployment and being charged for their education.
Askyourgran, do we need your God to be good people- no we do not- and a return to the church having significant power over the masses would be a gigantic step backwards.
''The fact is that people who are part of a group are more likely to follow suit and learn the ways of right and wrong.''- what the hell gives you that impression? You also seem to forget that we are all part of a group anyway- society is the largest group there is, and I welcome all the colour and diversity that ours lends, and the lessons that it teaches us in terms of tolerence and respect without the pinput of anyone's mythical superbeing who rules by fear. 10,000 years in the fiery abyss anyone, if you've got doubts as to his existence?
The question of abuse in the church is not ' inane', you clearly have never suffered by it, but those of us who have ( I finally plucked up courage to tell our priest that my father beat me half to death most days and to ask for help- and the priest dragged me home and told my father what I'd said- the resulting beating left me with a permanent brain injury)- and there were those far worse off than I who were beaten, raped and tortured by the church in Ireland and further afield- so I'd appreciate it if you'd show some knowledge of the 'right and wrong' you reckon the church has given you and not post disrespectful drivel about their suffering being ' inane' or unworthy of discussion here.
I was brought up where religion was everything, p[eople died every day because they were not the right religion or because they showed compassion to those of another faith, and I grew up to be full of hatred and violence with no respect for anyone or anything. It took meeting my wife before any of that changed and I am happy to say that my children are 100% better people than I could have ever hoped to be because they WEREN'T brought up surrounded by religious dogma. They are not directionless or 'lacking in moral fibre' as you so high handedly put it and niether are the vast majority of kids these days. They don't need religion to teach them to be good people they need sound political leaders to enable them to be the very best people they can be without fears of unemployment and being charged for their education.
Askyourgran, do we need your God to be good people- no we do not- and a return to the church having significant power over the masses would be a gigantic step backwards.
@Ask your Gran - The one thing you absolutely do not need is a "divine right" to criticise religion. It is also entirely acceptable to criticise those who portray the equivalence of religion with the moral high ground - as if having religion automatically confers greater moral sensibility - A moments perusal of the recent press involving various people within the catholic church should tell you that. The questions of abuse, in the context of morality and religion, is most certainly not inane, but an entirely apposite example of the dangers of assuming a higher moral code amongst those who are the most obviously religious.
The OP makes a sweeping generalisation - that morality is failing within the wider society - in the absence of anything except a personal observation. They then go on to say that, as an Atheist, they see a greater role in society for religious groups. It is a mistake to say, without proper evidence, that we are at a greater risk of failure of morality now than at other times in history. Morality is not an absolute - it is relative, and often mixed with cultural values, which are always changing. To make such sweeping assertions as the OP did demonises the entire society, which is patently wrong. To then suggest that the Church can somehow step in and lead us out of our moral quagmire is equally facile, in my opinion - The church is increasingly an irrelevance. If they wish to help, I suppose that is fine, but with their teachings comes the usual baggage of medieval age fairy tales and exclusiveness, all of which only serves to heighten divisiveness within society.
Divine right indeed!
The OP makes a sweeping generalisation - that morality is failing within the wider society - in the absence of anything except a personal observation. They then go on to say that, as an Atheist, they see a greater role in society for religious groups. It is a mistake to say, without proper evidence, that we are at a greater risk of failure of morality now than at other times in history. Morality is not an absolute - it is relative, and often mixed with cultural values, which are always changing. To make such sweeping assertions as the OP did demonises the entire society, which is patently wrong. To then suggest that the Church can somehow step in and lead us out of our moral quagmire is equally facile, in my opinion - The church is increasingly an irrelevance. If they wish to help, I suppose that is fine, but with their teachings comes the usual baggage of medieval age fairy tales and exclusiveness, all of which only serves to heighten divisiveness within society.
Divine right indeed!
Gran, //At least you realise that the Finsbury Park inhabitants will be less patient than us with your continuing diatribe on here.//
Good grief! Your train of thought goes from bad to worse. So you tell me that people of religion will possibly harm me for expressing my opinion - and you admire that? You think that's right? Where are your principles? Is that really what religion has done to you? And 'patience'? You are 'patient' with me? Your arrogance is astounding! Fortunately for the world, that previously impregnable wall that religion has constructed around itself over the past couple of thousand years, and that you think still exists, is crumbling. Like others who speak out against perverted dogma, I see nothing to respect in lies.
Unfortunately, if we depend upon religion to teach our children, contrary to your belief that education does not have to follow the bible or the koran, it does. Of course, those who follow the koran claim they are not selective - although in actual fact they are - and depending upon the flavour of Christianity that suits you best, you can pick and choose the bits of the bible you like - but that doesn't detract from the fact that both books contain an evil and damaging philosophy. Religion revolves around the concept of sin but fails to acknowledge that 'sin' does not necessarily equate to social 'crime'. Religion ensures that its adherents suffer unnecessary guilt for perceived 'sin' and therefore it weakens the intellect. If it didn't, the religious would be oblivious to the prospect of eternal damnation, the fear would be removed, and religion would be obsolete. Do you really think it's a good thing to raise your children with such a spectre hovering over their lives? As Nox and LazyGun have both said, the question of abuse is far from inane.
How do I know there is no other force to reckon with? Unlike you and the rest who claim special insight, I don't - I've never claimed to know - but I'm pretty convinced the particular force that you think exists doesn't. If you read your God's history instead of clinging to an imaginary, benign being who takes a special personal interest in all-important you, you might understand why. I'm far from naive because rather than believe what other people want me to believe, as you do, I examine the facts - and the facts are not compatible with the fable.
Good grief! Your train of thought goes from bad to worse. So you tell me that people of religion will possibly harm me for expressing my opinion - and you admire that? You think that's right? Where are your principles? Is that really what religion has done to you? And 'patience'? You are 'patient' with me? Your arrogance is astounding! Fortunately for the world, that previously impregnable wall that religion has constructed around itself over the past couple of thousand years, and that you think still exists, is crumbling. Like others who speak out against perverted dogma, I see nothing to respect in lies.
Unfortunately, if we depend upon religion to teach our children, contrary to your belief that education does not have to follow the bible or the koran, it does. Of course, those who follow the koran claim they are not selective - although in actual fact they are - and depending upon the flavour of Christianity that suits you best, you can pick and choose the bits of the bible you like - but that doesn't detract from the fact that both books contain an evil and damaging philosophy. Religion revolves around the concept of sin but fails to acknowledge that 'sin' does not necessarily equate to social 'crime'. Religion ensures that its adherents suffer unnecessary guilt for perceived 'sin' and therefore it weakens the intellect. If it didn't, the religious would be oblivious to the prospect of eternal damnation, the fear would be removed, and religion would be obsolete. Do you really think it's a good thing to raise your children with such a spectre hovering over their lives? As Nox and LazyGun have both said, the question of abuse is far from inane.
How do I know there is no other force to reckon with? Unlike you and the rest who claim special insight, I don't - I've never claimed to know - but I'm pretty convinced the particular force that you think exists doesn't. If you read your God's history instead of clinging to an imaginary, benign being who takes a special personal interest in all-important you, you might understand why. I'm far from naive because rather than believe what other people want me to believe, as you do, I examine the facts - and the facts are not compatible with the fable.
askyourgran //Religion or belief in something is not control if you willingly wish to learn the lessons in a bid to become a better person. It is very sad that you believe that religion somehow weakens the intellect. //
Religion, BY DEFINITION, is control and weakens the intellect.
As pointed out by Christopher Hitchens:
"The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre,"
Only a weakened intellect would accept that an ultimate morality could have been written thousands of years ago by an isolated group of men.
Religion, BY DEFINITION, is control and weakens the intellect.
As pointed out by Christopher Hitchens:
"The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre,"
Only a weakened intellect would accept that an ultimate morality could have been written thousands of years ago by an isolated group of men.
No,not every Christian is mature enough to choose right from wrong on the basis of Bible principles. Some lack sufficient knowledge, others fail to employ their thinking ability.As I found on here, One might ask others to make important decisions for him because of laziness or the desire to have someone else share the responsibility. Perhaps he really would like to take a certain course of action and hopes the other person’s conscience will approve it, even if his own does not. Whatever the reason, failure to carry your own load of responsibility is to your disadvantage.
Here it is well to distinguish between a principle and a law. A law asks that you simply obey. A principle asks that you do your own thinking and apply or extend the principle to your own case. This calls to mind Paul’s words at Hebrews 5:14: “Solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” These facts have led many thinking people, even atheists, to recognize the moral value of belief in God.
Here it is well to distinguish between a principle and a law. A law asks that you simply obey. A principle asks that you do your own thinking and apply or extend the principle to your own case. This calls to mind Paul’s words at Hebrews 5:14: “Solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong.” These facts have led many thinking people, even atheists, to recognize the moral value of belief in God.
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV7 mins ago
News10 mins ago
Dores Anyone Know What This Means...
Technology15 mins ago
News16 mins ago
ChatterBank18 mins ago
