Atheist morality

Of course, what you watch, think and joke about are you.

someone posed that problem to me a few years ago, except in christian-speak: "when we are born again in christ, we are made a new being. if you're not different now than before you were saved, how do you know you're a christian?"i didn't really have an answer then, either.two possible solutions:1. i was always a christian in some respect, even when i was an athiest. if religion is defined by morality, then this is the case. i've always treated other how i want to be treated, i didn't need a 2000 year old invisible man in the sky to tell me that. my parents worked well enough.2. i am not a christian now. this would be the case if change defines religion. as it turns out, this may actually be case. i seem no longer able to justify my faith with it's own history, and have already rejected a good portion of the new testament as just wrong. however, i still believe, if not in the traditional sense.and i do gather that my faith is rather uncommon. hard to find other people that share it.but basically my position is summed up like this. if god disappeared or didn't exist, i'd still treat other people in the way i feel they'd like to be treated. my relationships with other people are not affected by the presence or absence of my belief in something that is not those other people. nor should it be.the things jesus taught are good advice, whether or not you believe he is the son of god.

Thanks Arach, this is really the point of the OP. You may be an athiest.

no, if anything i'm a non-kosher jew.although on a recent live-journal-type quize thing that went around, i tested muslim.

One of the chosen-people are you?Or a believer in Allah?If you can't decide what god you believe in then,you just might be an athiest.(pardon JF)

You might know what GOD you believe in but have trouble deciding on a religion.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

what jar said.no, the muslim thing was a joke. i've been cracking (non-derogatory) muslim jokes all week, actually. for instance, i entered three of my photos into a student art show this week, but didn't get any in, and i said "they're just prejudiced against muslims!"did you catch the allah reference earlier? it's really just self amusement, because although i have a lot of respect of the reasonable normal muslims, i just can't picture myself as one.but no, i've been toying with the idea of converting to judaism for a while. the only thing that really keeps me is the adhereance to the law. i wouldn't be able to do it. but my friends know the story of my conversion. it wasn't a jesus story that did me in, it was an abraham story. i shoulda been a jew. i just happen to like jesus's teachings. and sorta believe in him too.

Considering that my morality is, in many ways, radically different from my father's, I fail to see your point.We accumulate our personal morality bit by bit, every day, as long as we live. Parents can be, and often are, one source from which to draw inspiration on the subject, along with countless others. If you're referring to my penis, it's actually pretty rare that it's inspired to do something that I think would be morally wrong. And for my part, I didn't know anyone would be looking for even an ounce of truthfulness in that last post. I just figured he went on a rampage because he had to live in Minnesota. I mean... wouldn't you?

---

"You can't expect him to be answering your prayers when he's not real, can you? That's like writing to the characters of a soap opera and expecting a reply, Mr. Silly Sausage!"
-Jane Christie

So then, it's not what we "think and watch", because regardless of the subculture of what we think and watch, it comes down to delusion, extremism, and psychosis. Again, not what we "think and watch", but mental illness and repression.It seems like you've changed your position once it was pointed out that those steeped in Christian culture commit heinous acts... I am NOT aware. Show me reliable data - specifically pointing out the relative rates of suicide among clergy and psychiatrists, normalized for other demographic variables to demonstrate a true correlation between occupation and suicide rate.Otherwise you've simply made another random statement that a "religious" demographic is more moral than what you perceive as a "non-religious" demographic.While you're gathering data, perhaps you'd like to compare the rate of child molestation by clergy with that by psychiatrists and other occupations.This message has been edited by pink sasquatch, 03-24-2005 01:57 PM

I am reminded of what Confucious said to a king of one of the Spring and Autumn kingdoms. The king asked him how he could make sure that his subjects were honest with him. Confucious replied, "Be honest yourself."Of course this got him kicked out of the kingdom.

I did look into the data. My stat was given to me years ago in college by one of my professors and I had never bothered to validate it. Apparantly, there is no clear data out there, but other professions with access to firearms have greater rates than do shrinks.
http://mypage.iusb.edu/~jmcintos/usa2002summary.htmConcerning the molestation, do you think that molesters seek employment in jobs with easy access to children? Hence clergy/teacher/coach? I can't imagine genuine clergy turning into molesters in large number...apparantly the molesters were posing as clergy. Comments?

Was your link supposed to have occupational data? I saw that firearms where the #1 method of suicide, but nothing about professions with access to firearms. This is a nice example of the "no true scotsman fallacy"; as in:Pink: More clergy molest children than members of any other occupation.
Phat: Ah! But molesters aren't true clergy.Sort of like if I answer your suicide data by claiming "no true psychiatrist would kill themselves," or claims of atheist immorality by claiming "well, no true atheist would live immorally..." That probably is a factor in some cases. But to claim that "clergy who molest" are actually "molesters who clergy" is far too simplistic.For example, I wonder about the role of celibacy as well, especially since the majority of reported clergy-who-molest are Catholic priests. That is, a simple reading of the numbers would suggest that more children are molested by celibate clergy than by non-celibate clergy.

I saw a link that mentioned security guards and armed guards in general having higher risks. I did not find any conclusive listed data. The verdict is inconclusive. While I know that happily married couples are usually the best role models and usually the best adjusted youth pastors, I also have read where celibacy itself is not the issue. If this were the case, single counselors could use other outlets for sexual tension that would not comprimise their profession. Interestingly enough, most Christian sources on the issue of sexual sin seem to indicate that methods of release/relief such as internet porn, for example, tend to increase tension rather than alleviate it.Similarly, there are instances of some molestors who are married.
The solution, it seems, is to be able to monitor and pinpoint those who are good for and with children vs those who are predatory and who spend months grooming their victims. Accountability and familiarity go a long way, but some molestors are good friends with the families of the victims.It is similar to identifying the next school shooter.
ome signs can be recognized, but so many kids have those signs.I myself could be profiled as a potential molester, only because I am observed to be unmarried, I have an affinity for teenage youth, and I am very good at talking with them. What am I supposed to do? Go get married when I have no desire to do so just so I can look good in the eyes of the church? I think not. Let them talk about me!

I don't think it is. I think there is a case for anyone to make that clergy who end up molesting kids (or adults for that matter) aren't actually clergy.Their official duties clash pretty mightily with those actions. To do them, and continue to do them, yet remain clergy... especially when the actions themselves bring believers into "wrong" action... is to remove onesself from that profession.This holds for other professions as well. I guess when a cop goes bad, I'd see it more as a case of a criminal with a badge, than a cop who happens to be a criminal.Of course this should be for priests who commit all sorts of other violations of their faith. All this said, if for some reason the faith does allow for fallen or "ailing" people to continue to practice as clergy (I am not sure if this is the case with Catholocism) then I think it does hold true that they are clergy who molest, and not molesters acting as clergy. In that case they'd be no different than any other fallen person.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I suppose the question is really along the lines of: I don't think that is what happens. So if the issue is "is the morality (whatever that is) of the godly somehow superior to that of others?" then the answer has to be " well no not really"...unless (As Pink points out) you want to revert to the "no true scotsman" line of thinking.