Morals in the absence of a belief in God.

I have often been posed the question about morals in the absence of belief in a God.  Well for starters, an Agnostic is not against belief in God but is in a state of “the jury is out deliberating”.

If we use an atheist if they posses moral values and how they determine good, bad etc, what would they say?

To suggest that those without God cannot posses moral values is simply ludicrous.  My experience has been, although limited, that many of the “godless’ have more consistent and better moral standards than the “godly”.

Christians often refer to the Mosaic law as one of the first standards set for humanity, particularly the tribes that became known as Israel.  However, this list of 613 laws was by no means the first.  There were many list of laws that predate the Mosaic law, some say these even informed and influenced it.  The Code of Hummurabi is one of the more famous ones.

Moving from the ancient to the modern, people like myself are guided and influenced by world events and moved by the pain that many of the oppressed peoples of the world experience.  On an individual level I live by an all encompassing “law” of my own making that says “be selfish, as long as it doesn’t adversely affect others”.  The others also includes animals, plant life and our whole environment.  In my own moral standards, it is simply not enough to include people.  In some ways I have made the royal law of Jesus much more complete.  The respect for only human life ultimately lead to the destruction of human life.  If the whole environment is respected and treated as holy then all life benefits.

So in my own mind, the absence of God has provided a more complete and balanced set of values.  The laws that religion proports to be of God add confusion and create more adversity in this world, in my opinion.

My own royal law, informs all that I do and say and gives my life purpose and many goals to achieve.

I have to ask the question “if God’s law was so perfect, why have Christians abandoned parts of it?”  I have heard many people say that the Mosaic law is finished with, while others still select parts they wish to adhere to.  Is the idea that it was perfect, just a personal notion by the Psalmist or what?

Another point to consider is the changing nature of moral behaviour.  What is evil and immoral at one point in time, is considered good and amoral at another point.  Historically, the religious have pointed to the Bible and God to justify these moral pronouncements.  I think I have mentioned it before, but an interesting case in point is the issue of men and women bathing together.  In the early part of the 20^th century it was deemed wrong.  Now, few if any paint any immorality to the practice.  How many people deem the zipper as immoral?  Well many did, describing it as providing quick access to moral oblivion.  We have spoken a lot about intimacy.  Depending on the time and place, various degrees of intimacy between two or more people have been labelled with a wide variance of immoral or moral attributes.

These issues are often complicated misunderstood and completely misdirected by ideas of God and religion.

In my own thinking, something is wrong because it harms someone or something, not because it is against some god or gods.  This is why so many people view the various ideas of God as so immoral.  Because, his actions do so much harm to those who least deserve it.  I have had so many Christians tell me that the Tsunami victims or the victims of poverty and hunger in the 10-40 window deserve their treatment because of their rejection of God.  How pathetically sad!  This is how God’s law distorts and perverts people’s thinking.  Have a look at http://users.tpg.com.au/mlsheen/societies_worse_off.htm for an article on how some societies are worse off with God, compared to others without God.