Straggler writes:
Many critics of atheism seem to imply that atheism is an excuse to be morally flexible and that with no firm foundation for morality atheists are all too willing to attack the moral basis of others whilst refusing to defend the basis of their own 'slippery' position.
Is this true? Do atheists necessarily lack a firm sense of the moral and immoral?
nemesis_juggernaut writes:
An atheist cannot be pinned down to any true moral position, where as a theistic position is easily identifiable because its parameters have been officially established... their {atheist’s} morals are relative to what ever beliefs about {what} they are prepared to identify with.
Saying that atheists don’t have morals, or lack the ability to firmly establish moral from immoral, is just a form of prejudice. The argument appears to be that atheists, lacking a scriptural reference, can not put their morals in words to substantiate their view. However, I think atheists are capable of setting ”official parameters’ for themselves. I have a written 'moral code' that I made for myself from my conclusion on what I consider to be moral.
I don’t see why non-religious morals should be considered slippery or flexible in comparison to religious morals.
While religions have defined creeds to judge morals on, you don’t need a scripture to figure out morals. Not having them written down doesn’t make them less real. Religious people tend to focus on different aspects of their creed as they progress through life. Your morality naturally changes as you mature - defined by scriptures or figured out for yourself, there is flexibility for personal growth. Therefore, religious & non-religious moral are both flexible.
Now, are they slippery? You could in fact claim that religious morals are more slippery. For starters, many religion have absolution (dictionary definition - the act of absolving; a freeing from blame or guilt; release from consequences, obligation or penalties) a religious premises that if certain religious rights, ”good deeds’ or beliefs held, can remove responsibility for your immoral action(s) from you.
What greater leniency for immorality can you get?
On the other hand an atheist knows they are responsible for their immoral acts and nothing will remove that responsibility.
(Please note, people who consider no act to be immoral can/have/will still claim to be part of a religion or atheists. They are incomprehensible, even to themselves, so it is unfair to judge a faction by that unreasonable minority that can/may occur in any faction).
Edited by MadaManga, : No reason given.
Edited by MadaManga, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
