tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post1972498346849932464..comments2023-10-20T02:08:39.524-07:00Comments on Atheism: Proving The Negative: Believing in God is ImmoralMatt McCormickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17071078570021986664noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-9484378330866628922009-10-13T00:48:43.467-07:002009-10-13T00:48:43.467-07:00Might I recommend 'Why Christianity Fails Chri...Might I recommend 'Why Christianity Fails Christopher Hitchens' on YouTube. It is a illustrated presentation of a brilliant opening rhetoric delivered by the man in a debate regarding the veracity and acceptability of Christianity. He expounds on the concept of Christianity being immoral, focusing on the aspect of Jesus himself, and the attributing of all humanity's sins on him. I quote: "I don't believe that it is true that religion is moral or ethical...Is it moral to believe that your sins can be forgiven by the punishment of another person? Is it ethical to believe that? I would submit that the doctrine of vicarious redemption by human redemption is inherently immoral... The name for that in primitive Middle Eastern society was scapegoating - you pile all the sins of a tribe on a goat, and you drive that goat into the desert to die of thirst and hunger, and you think you've taken away the sins of the tribe. A positively immoral doctrine that abolishes the concept of personal responsibility on which all ethics and all morality must depend."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-13963532084784410622009-02-28T15:18:00.000-08:002009-02-28T15:18:00.000-08:00Great post, Matt!I would like to address what the ...Great post, Matt!<BR/><BR/>I would like to address what the Anonymous reader says above with respect to internal and external moral compasses.<BR/><BR/>Each believer decides for himself what God is and what God believes is right or wrong. The classic example of this is how the majority of Catholics disagree with many of Church's moral teachings (e.g. birth control). So in the end, whether they believe in God or not, everyone ultimately decides what is right or wrong according to their own internal compass.<BR/><BR/>There is no such thing as an external compass that really provides moral guidance, since everyone uses their internal compasses to evaluate what any external compass says. The fact that we can not all agree on everything is not that bad. We do have consensus about murder, rape, robbery, theft, fraud, etc. being morally wrong, and that's what matters.<BR/><BR/>That there is no such thing as an effective external compass is further illustrated by the fact that no external compass helps resolve any of the gray area moral issues, like abortion, cloning, gay marriage, death penalty, mercy killing, etc., and, if anything, claims of guidance by religious external compasses only hinders progress on these issues.<BR/><BR/>Dawkins explains much of this at length in his book The God Delusion, which I highly recommend, especially to anyone who has found this article and has stumbled along this far.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-74194005757058937292008-07-26T16:38:00.000-07:002008-07-26T16:38:00.000-07:00When it comes to God and morality the point (often...When it comes to God and morality the point (often missed) is that people need an outside reference to use as their moral compass.<BR/><BR/>Countries legislate it. People of faith have the morality taught in their faith which normally meshes fairly well with the laws of the land.<BR/><BR/>Internal moral compasses only work of we all have a perfect grasp of right and wrong. We don't.<BR/><BR/>As for your basic premise. "Believing in God is Immoral" Since you can change it to "Not Believing in God is Immoral" and use essentially the same argument. It's really kind of a moot argument.<BR/><BR/>At this point it's clear that your arguments are biased in that they presuppose that you are already an atheist instead of building from the common ground that Believers and Atheists have in common. Logic and Philosophy try to build up their argument from that common ground.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-55992242778390362712008-07-12T16:10:00.000-07:002008-07-12T16:10:00.000-07:00Again, your argument here only holds sway if one h...Again, your argument here only holds sway if one has liberal political beliefs. Godless Pro-lifers exist. Matt Wallace is conservative on most issues.<BR/>Some theists also have no specific religion.<BR/>Your arguments do not apply to everyone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-74613429826204664902007-04-27T10:46:00.000-07:002007-04-27T10:46:00.000-07:00Thanks to Paul and to Steve for their insights. T...Thanks to Paul and to Steve for their insights. The full version of the essay and Powerpoint presentation I recently did on this topic is at:<BR/><BR/>Nammour Symposium 2007: Believing in God is Immoral (PowerPoint 2003 version)<BR/><BR/>Nammour Symposium 2007: Believing in God is Immoral (PowerPoint 2007 version)Matt McCormickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17071078570021986664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-29991692346885027322007-04-26T21:12:00.000-07:002007-04-26T21:12:00.000-07:00There are some good reasons for thinking that beli...There are some good reasons for thinking that belief in "god" is immoral.<BR/><BR/>One of the most obvious reasons is that belief in "god" typically entails a validation of extreme violence -- see: the Old Testament and the Koran.<BR/><BR/>See: Rape, murder and genocide.<BR/><BR/>See: Stoning, cannibalism and incest.<BR/><BR/>See: Infanticide and the assassination of children.<BR/><BR/>So, if G entails the validation or promotion of V (cruel/wanton violence), then belief in G is immoral.<BR/><BR/>What many theists too easily overlook -- probably because they are taught by priests and ministers not to read all of the bible, or to ignore the immorality of it's passages through creative interpretation and apologetics -- is that belief in god typically entails G & V.<BR/><BR/>One may wonder why this is the case, until one considers what G's primary ontological purpose is -- to control the masses as a kind of invisible hammer.<BR/><BR/>Therefore, if the very concept of G is actually that of a weapon -- is it any surprise that G typically entails violence in the figure of an angry and wrathful "father?"<BR/><BR/>G is a patriarchal construct for power and control.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8716347331682132223.post-29794572462807174642007-04-17T17:38:00.000-07:002007-04-17T17:38:00.000-07:00Matt are you suggesting that any belief in God is ...Matt are you suggesting that any belief in God is immoral? Surely we can say that most religious beliefs are immoral. However, it seems possible to me that if somebody has a god-sensing experience which they attribute only that they believe God touched them in some personal way and do not attribute any particular religious system to this, they can still have a theistic belief in which they only hold that God exists. They may not preach their belief in God to children. They can still hold a non-divine theory of ethics. They don't use it as a foundation to solving social problems. In fact they can even be a scientist supporting scientific advancements and human progress. The only bad thing, as you claim, they may promote in their own thinking is of a odd supernatural entity, yet they keep their belief personal. They do not put down atheists for their non-belief. Do they necessarily act immorally by simply believing in God? Is it possible that any belief in God be amoral, as in neither moral or immoral? Granted this is a rare theist, but it doesn't seem to be immediately understood as immoral.<BR/>Furthermore, your claim that you can believe something which you know to be false is rather odd. Is this even possible. If I claim to know X, I claim to believe X, don't I? It seems odd to say that I can know something is false, yet believe it anyways. It maybe true that I don't have a solid argument for X's existence, except to say that I had an experience which is consistent with a god-like entity. I do not personally hold such a belief, but it seems rather strong to suggest it is never possible to hold a belief in God and be moral at the same time.<BR/>Lastly, what about Deists. Those that believe in God, but not a personal God. Are they immoral?Paul Hickshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05878908481678715082noreply@blogger.com