Harrumphrey

Absurd. Please read this:

http://www.ffrf.org/pennstation/commandments.html

Harrumphrey

You're actually quoting Confucius. The "golden rule" says merely, "Do unto others," not "Do NOT do unto others".

500 years before Christianity, Conficius wrote, "Don't do to others what you would not have them do to you."

While the principle is not the end-all of ethics, it's better than the alleged Christian "golden rule" because it emphasizes that the essence of morality is the prevention of harm.

Asha'man

Personally, I think the Ten Commandments are a piece of crap. I also think that the 2nd Ten Commandments aren't any better. As JCS pointed out so nicely, only 2-3 are worth anything at all in today's society.

If you want to see a good set of 10 commandments, take a look at the ones written by Solon the Athenian.


But the original question was about the atheist basis for morality.

Tell me, Violent Messiah, are you so unimaginative that you can't think of any other reason to behave in society? Do you honestly believe that religious morality is the only thing holding civilization together?

Zadok001

Also, Violent Messiah, you need to read your Exodus again. The 'Ten' commandments are in no way held above the other five hundred or so commandments from God to the Israelites. They aren't even FIRST, for crying out loud! Among the other commandments are (paraphrasing) "Thou shalt not boil a lamb in it's mother's milk," and "Sleeping with a woman during her period is unclean.'

Why do you select ten of these commandments, and hold them in reverence above the other five hundred? What makes those ten special? Certainly nothing I could find in _my_ Bible!

Gary Welsh

We atheists don't have any standards of morality. We're just a gang of destructive hedonists who ride around with biker chicks on Harleys, smashing mailboxes. We're totally out of control.

"YEEE-HAW! We can do whatever we want, without a GAWD!"

That's what we usually shout as we throw empty whiskey bottles over our shoulders, and lay tire in the church parking lot.

emotional

1) I don't think they have, and

2) I don't think they need any.

There needn't be any basis for morality. One needs to behave morally just because. Stop searching for a basis, rational or otherwise, for morality. Morality just is. No reason, no basis, and no need for any. Case closed.

Hawkingfan

So the only thing preventing you from murdering people is because it says not to kill in the Ten Commandments?

Edited to add: Damn, someone already pointed this out (K).

xian

the truth is that atheists have no logical standard for morality......but they still have a standard nontheless.

that standard is simply the moral law that they refuse to identify. i would never call an atheist an amoral person...that would not be fair, and it is wrong. they are moral beings like any other human. they just do not have a logical basis for their morality. its kind of one of those "mysteries".

keyser_soze

Of course there is a logical basis. It is based on society. To remain homogenous you must work not only for the good of yourself, but for the group. This is an old concept, I find it curious that you cannot understand it. Of course other things play into it, parental guidance, all input from your surrounding world, etc. I think you are purposefully being obtuse. To me, only those lacking adequate mental faculty require an external source of control to prevent running amok. I could never concieve of taking something from someone else unless it meant starvation for myself or my family, and even then I would exhaust every other recourse first. And before you go thinking me a tree hugging hippy love in type person, think again...I support the death penalty for predators, even to the point I would volunteer to do it myself if asked. The safety of the community MUST be maintained if at all possible. I know of no moral limits that a religious person has, that I don't with regard to human interaction. The commandments are BS, but any rules that happen to exist in a religion that benefit the self, and the group without harming anyone have support. Do I intend to go stoning those who have an affair, or will I insist that the retarded or infirm cannot go to services at a church? No. Nothing in my nature makes me want to go out and dash babies or rape and slaughter women and children. The very thought is repugnant. I am ex military, so I have no compunctions about defending people or myself with lethal force WHEN REQUIRED. But I'm just not the islamic or judaic based "Slaughter at god's behest" kind of guy.

Women and children first. The christian god fails to meet my criteria of what to me is moral. The fact that he doesn't exist, makes it even easier, it's just a violent mythology. But damned if I would encourage anyone to follow such a being if it did exist.

Gary Welsh

What's so 'logical' about having a 'superstitious' basis for morality?