Comments on: Can a Religious Person Really be “Good”? http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/ Enlightenment through common sense Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:36:35 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Joel http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-2/#comment-1286 Joel Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:50:40 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-1286 *in a hundred years it wouldn't matter *in a hundred years it wouldn’t matter

]]> By: Joel http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-2/#comment-1283 Joel Wed, 16 Dec 2009 06:41:16 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-1283 I would not agree that our genes tell us to be nice or charitable. That completely goes against the Darwinian evolution that most atheists believe in. There are truly selfless acts. Think about this example: When a soldier jumps onto a grenade so that his fellow soldiers don't die, how is he being selfish? Why would his genes tell him to destroy the very fragile and short life that he had so that other people could live? Wouldn't his "selfish" genes tell him to run for cover so that he could live and procreate so that his genes survive and reproduce? And "nice" is a very subjective term, especially in Darwinian evolutionary theory. There is no ground for something being "nice" or "not nice," "good" or "not good." Everything is meaningless in this theory and there are no accountability factors. In 100 years it would matter if you were a Hitler or a Mother Theresa, both end up in the same abyss of nothingness. I would not agree that our genes tell us to be nice or charitable. That completely goes against the Darwinian evolution that most atheists believe in. There are truly selfless acts. Think about this example:

When a soldier jumps onto a grenade so that his fellow soldiers don’t die, how is he being selfish? Why would his genes tell him to destroy the very fragile and short life that he had so that other people could live? Wouldn’t his “selfish” genes tell him to run for cover so that he could live and procreate so that his genes survive and reproduce?

And “nice” is a very subjective term, especially in Darwinian evolutionary theory. There is no ground for something being “nice” or “not nice,” “good” or “not good.” Everything is meaningless in this theory and there are no accountability factors. In 100 years it would matter if you were a Hitler or a Mother Theresa, both end up in the same abyss of nothingness.

]]> By: Avoid responsibility by wasting time with Jesus? http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-2/#comment-1081 Avoid responsibility by wasting time with Jesus? Sun, 25 Oct 2009 20:18:08 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-1081 [...] questioned the motives of the religious before, and I’ve also questioned using religion as a source of morality, and while the post [...] [...] questioned the motives of the religious before, and I’ve also questioned using religion as a source of morality, and while the post [...]

]]> By: The Self-Defeating Morality from Religion Argument http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-2/#comment-993 The Self-Defeating Morality from Religion Argument Fri, 17 Jul 2009 21:49:57 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-993 [...] the religious turn? The answer has to be fear.  I’ve lightly touched on this subject before, when I asked if a religious person can ever really be good.  The two topics are highly related as they both strike at the heart of religion-based morality.  [...] [...] the religious turn? The answer has to be fear.  I’ve lightly touched on this subject before, when I asked if a religious person can ever really be good.  The two topics are highly related as they both strike at the heart of religion-based morality.  [...]

]]> By: The Atheist’s Challenge - 22 Questions http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-892 The Atheist’s Challenge - 22 Questions Sat, 30 May 2009 20:06:36 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-892 [...] The popular, but incorrect concept that morality is dependant on religion is one of the hurdles atheists must overcome in order to be openly welcomed by the masses. The idea that morality can be controlled by the fear of reprisal (as pushed by the major religions - don’t do these things or you’ll go to hell) or the promise of reward (do as we say and you’ll get into Heaven) is dangerous. It encourages extremism, just look at what Muslim extremists will do to make the acquaintance of virgins. Morality born out of this carrot and stick approach inevitably leads to selfish endeavours. [...] [...] The popular, but incorrect concept that morality is dependant on religion is one of the hurdles atheists must overcome in order to be openly welcomed by the masses. The idea that morality can be controlled by the fear of reprisal (as pushed by the major religions – don’t do these things or you’ll go to hell) or the promise of reward (do as we say and you’ll get into Heaven) is dangerous. It encourages extremism, just look at what Muslim extremists will do to make the acquaintance of virgins. Morality born out of this carrot and stick approach inevitably leads to selfish endeavours. [...]

]]> By: Jamie http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-870 Jamie Mon, 25 May 2009 16:13:36 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-870 What Polly Anna, the Atheist, and others have all touched on is the question of whether a TRULY selfless good deed exists. It is a depressing notion, though not a bad one. The fact is, an atheist, with no religious motivation, can give to charity, but the fact that they feel good about themself for doing so shows some sort of selfish motivation, even if it is innocuous. As I stated, it's not a bad thing, to have selfish motivations for doing something. It's actually an almost universal instinct with social animals. Early humans who helped other members of the group (tribe? pack? whatever) were rewarded by reciprocation of favours and the like. Basically, it's in our genes to be nice to each other, but only because it makes our lives better, whether through direct, tangible rewards, such as money; or intangible emotions. What Polly Anna, the Atheist, and others have all touched on is the question of whether a TRULY selfless good deed exists. It is a depressing notion, though not a bad one. The fact is, an atheist, with no religious motivation, can give to charity, but the fact that they feel good about themself for doing so shows some sort of selfish motivation, even if it is innocuous.

As I stated, it’s not a bad thing, to have selfish motivations for doing something. It’s actually an almost universal instinct with social animals. Early humans who helped other members of the group (tribe? pack? whatever) were rewarded by reciprocation of favours and the like.

Basically, it’s in our genes to be nice to each other, but only because it makes our lives better, whether through direct, tangible rewards, such as money; or intangible emotions.

]]> By: Psy http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-421 Psy Wed, 31 Dec 2008 02:35:13 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-421 ~"We are all filthy rags. We all deserve death/punishment/judgment. He paid our debt,"~ Yes, tell people they are worthless and that they owe you a debt that you can not repay. Sounds more like an abusive husband or slave owner. A good slave will defend his/her master and the church has had a few thousand years to perfect their psychology to an art form. ~”We are all filthy rags. We all deserve death/punishment/judgment. He paid our debt,”~

Yes, tell people they are worthless and that they owe you a debt that you can not repay. Sounds more like an abusive husband or slave owner. A good slave will defend his/her master and the church has had a few thousand years to perfect their psychology to an art form.

]]> By: Dawn http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-416 Dawn Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:17:47 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-416 When my mother was dying, I really didn't care that the hospice house was funded by a Christian charitable organization. We were able to have top notch care for my mother. I would have gladly brought her to an equally top notch Atheist hospice house. I am thankful for all the people out there that are able to look outside of themselves and sacrifice to do for others. My hat is off to them. Atheist (Atheists), I think we have VERY much in common with each other...maybe even 90%? When my mother was dying, I really didn’t care that the hospice house was funded by a Christian charitable organization. We were able to have top notch care for my mother. I would have gladly brought her to an equally top notch Atheist hospice house. I am thankful for all the people out there that are able to look outside of themselves and sacrifice to do for others. My hat is off to them. Atheist (Atheists), I think we have VERY much in common with each other…maybe even 90%?

]]> By: Dawn http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-415 Dawn Tue, 30 Dec 2008 15:19:37 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-415 The Atheist The charitable side of religion is actually one of the aspects I find most devious, purely because of they way the vulnerable are preyed upon and exploited. Christians want to share their point of view as well as Atheists. I would dare someone to go to a soup kitchen and be denied soup because they say "no thank you" to what might be "preached" there. What does it really matter what name AID is offered under? Who really cares? Especially if you are hungry. People are not so stupid to be brainwashed by anything and everything that is taught. We DO have some very vulnerable~poor~homeless~elderly~hardship people who are taken advantage of and mislead by Christians and Atheists alike every minute of every day. Making it better for those around us in these situations is a common goal to work toward together, whatever our beliefs may be. There really doesn't seem to be a reasonable argument for what name "Aid" falls under? The Atheist
The charitable side of religion is actually one of the aspects I find most devious, purely because of they way the vulnerable are preyed upon and exploited.

Christians want to share their point of view as well as Atheists. I would dare someone to go to a soup kitchen and be denied soup because they say “no thank you” to what might be “preached” there. What does it really matter what name AID is offered under? Who really cares? Especially if you are hungry. People are not so stupid to be brainwashed by anything and everything that is taught. We DO have some very vulnerable~poor~homeless~elderly~hardship people who are taken advantage of and mislead by Christians and Atheists alike every minute of every day. Making it better for those around us in these situations is a common goal to work toward together, whatever our beliefs may be. There really doesn’t seem to be a reasonable argument for what name “Aid” falls under?

]]> By: The Atheist http://www.the-atheist.com/can-a-religious-person-really-be-good/comment-page-1/#comment-414 The Atheist Tue, 30 Dec 2008 14:32:01 +0000 http://www.the-atheist.com/?p=60#comment-414 Thanks for the interesting, and somewhat heated debate. Returning to the point originally raised by <strong>Polly Anna</strong>, why do I care what someone's motives are, well I think the answer should be obvious, and Dawn helpfully responded with why I care. I care because charitable work is simply a mechanism to spread the "gospel". It's a method of taunting and tempting the <em>most vulnerable in our society</em>. "We have soup, you do not, come to our Church and accept out beliefs and you can have soup just like us". The charitable side of religion is actually one of the aspects I find most devious, purely because of they way the vulnerable are preyed upon and exploited. If you want to be charitable, and help those in need, why do you need to advertise that you are a religious group? Why is it "Christian Aid" and not just "Aid"? And by Jonathan's interpretation of the Bible, are those who participate in "Christian Aid" therefore going to be punished (or at least not rewarded) for it? Thanks for the interesting, and somewhat heated debate. Returning to the point originally raised by Polly Anna, why do I care what someone’s motives are, well I think the answer should be obvious, and Dawn helpfully responded with why I care. I care because charitable work is simply a mechanism to spread the “gospel”. It’s a method of taunting and tempting the most vulnerable in our society. “We have soup, you do not, come to our Church and accept out beliefs and you can have soup just like us”.

The charitable side of religion is actually one of the aspects I find most devious, purely because of they way the vulnerable are preyed upon and exploited. If you want to be charitable, and help those in need, why do you need to advertise that you are a religious group? Why is it “Christian Aid” and not just “Aid”? And by Jonathan’s interpretation of the Bible, are those who participate in “Christian Aid” therefore going to be punished (or at least not rewarded) for it?

]]>