Is religion the source of morality?

[TashaN]

We all are aware that there is a set of rules and a stanard of morality and it might not be excatly the same in all nations but all of them do have it or some, at least.

Nowadays, people tend to think that just because we live in a moral society so this have nothing to do with religion but with human beings developement, but how did human beings developed if they didn't take these ideas from other moral socities?

For instance, what if a girl loved her brother or uncle so much and wanted to marry him?

Some people might say, why not?

Nevertheless, we used to the idea that this is incest and she shouldn't do so. Religion say it's illegal to do so but some pagans and royal families were doing it in the past.

So what do you think?

Do people nowadays see it as incest just because religions made it prohibited to do so, and by default it was applied to the society as a general standard of morality with years?



P.S. please inform me if there is a similar thread to this one.

 

[Booko]

Nowadays, people tend to think that just because we live in a moral society so this have nothing to do with religion but with human beings developement, but how did human beings developed if they didn't take these ideas from other moral socities?

Historically, ethics and morals were derived from religion. Atheism is a fairly new think in human existence, and so ethics absent any religious influence is as well.

For instance, what if a girl loved her brother or uncle so much and wanted to marry him?

Some people might say, why not?

Nevertheless, we used to the idea that this is incest and she shouldn't do so. Religion say it's illegal to do so but some pagans and royal families were doing it in the past.

So what do you think?

We've observed over time that marriage between close relatives has disastrous results on the offspring.

Even in royal families, where first cousins were allowed to marry, there are problems. The high incidence of hemophilia in Queen Victoria's descendents is but one example.

Do people nowadays see it as incest just because religions made it prohibited to do so, and by default it was applied to the society as a general standard of morality with years?

These days, we understand there is the weight of science behind the prohibition as well.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

We all are aware that there is a set of rules and a stanard of morality and it might not be excatly the same in all nations but all of them do have it or some, at least.

Nowadays, people tend to think that just because we live in a moral society so this have nothing to do with religion but with human beings developement, but how did human beings developed if they didn't take these ideas from other moral socities?

For instance, what if a girl loved her brother or uncle so much and wanted to marry him?

Some people might say, why not?

Nevertheless, we used to the idea that this is incest and she shouldn't do so. Religion say it's illegal to do so but some pagans and royal families were doing it in the past.

So what do you think?

Do people nowadays see it as incest just because religions made it prohibited to do so, and by default it was applied to the society as a general standard of morality with years?



P.S. please inform me if there is a similar thread to this one.

Just as a reminder, there were a lot of people in 'organized' religions that have married incestuously. Please don't try to pin it on us Pagans.

I don't know offhand, in fact, of any religion that has prohibited marrying within the family. It seems more one of those things that society has developed over the years, possibly because marrying someone from another culture/ family would aid both families involved and would produce (hopefully) children that would have the genetic strength of both parents.

 

[Booko]

I don't know offhand, in fact, of any religion that has prohibited marrying within the family.

Well, mine does, but as recent as we are, I don't think we really count in this.

Hm, but what did you mean by within the family? Extended family...yeah, the more extended, the more acceptable.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Well, mine does, but as recent as we are, I don't think we really count in this.

You still count! :hug: (Unless you don't want to... Dear heavens, let me stop my waffling!)

 

[Sunstone]

I think that, generally speaking, a person's spirituality has more influence on their morals than does their religion. By "morals", I don't mean what people say their morals are, but instead I mean what they actually do in practice. It seems to me that, with some exceptions, religion is more likely to affect what a person says their morals are, while spirituality is more likely to affect what their morals really are.

 

[TashaN]

Just as a reminder, there were a lot of people in 'organized' religions that have married incestuously. Please don't try to pin it on us Pagans.

So you mean that there is no incest in Paganism?

I said just for instance but i didn't say ONLY pagans do it. Just from my observation, most of them were pagans who do such thing, that's all.

I don't know offhand, in fact, of any religion that has prohibited marrying within the family. It seems more one of those things that society has developed over the years, possibly because marrying someone from another culture/ family would aid both families involved and would produce (hopefully) children that would have the genetic strength of both parents.

It's a divine law from God in some religions that a marriage within the same family members is not allowed.

 

[TashaN]

These days, we understand there is the weight of science behind the prohibition as well.

Everyday we discover things which was already there for us since thousands of years, but only we know the reason behind doing that thing or that.

 

[Anti-World]

I don't know how religions couldn't be a source of morality. I mean, what other source is there? If someone got all their morals from themselves doesn't that become a religion in itself? I really don't understand how religion couldn't be a source of morals.

If it's a source of *all* morals I don't know. There seems to be laws and subtle changes in nature that cause the majority of humans in an area to act a certain way.

 

[Rough_ER]

I mean, what other source is there?

Natural selection; it often pays to be nice. hehe

 

[TashaN]

I think that, generally speaking, a person's spirituality has more influence on their morals than does their religion. By "morals", I don't mean what people say their morals are, but instead I mean what they actually do in practice. It seems to me that, with some exceptions, religion is more likely to affect what a person says their morals are, while spirituality is more likely to affect what their morals really are.

The source for religion is believed to be from God by most of people but what is the source of spirituality?

 

[Sunstone]

The source for religion is believed to be from God by most of people but what is the source of spirituality?

Either God, human nature, or both. Depends on whether you believe in God or not, I suppose.

 

[TashaN]

I don't know how religions couldn't be a source of morality. I mean, what other source is there? If someone got all their morals from themselves doesn't that become a religion in itself? I really don't understand how religion couldn't be a source of morals.

Then why unreligious people tend to call religions as "evil" for instance while it's the main source for their morality?

 

[TashaN]

Natural selection

How does this even work?

 

[TashaN]

Either God, human nature, or both. Depends on whether you believe in God or not, I suppose.

Does it matter whether you believe in God or not?

You are following a set of general rules and rituals which was forwarded by your society since long long time a go. Isn't it?

 

[Real Sorceror]

Is religion the source of morality?

Yes and no. A person can be moral without being religious, and a person can depend on religion for moral guidance. I say "guidance" because, even with religion, I think people still develop some of their own morals.
I don't believe in perfect moral absolutes, but neither do I accept total moral relativism. This, of course, is just a moral value I have developed on my own. Morals are truly relative, although like most people I only accpet a certian range of variation.

 

[Anti-World]

"Then why unreligious people tend to call religions as "evil" for instance while it's the main source for their morality?"

Hippocrites. They are usually referring to congregations though as well.

How does "natural selection" work? Who is doing the selecting. Maybe I'm just ignorant but wouldn't DNA have to have some sort of consciousness to be able to choose what is the best route to take to develop a creature? If natural selection is constantly trying to make the species better at surviving than why don't we live forever or completely rejuvinate ourselves rather than just dying out by genetics itself? If natural selection changed people to die out because of some outside source not associated with the DNA then how does the DNA know how to change? Natural selection and morals don't seem to work because it seems like DNA would have to be sentient to understand all of the things that it seems to adapt to.

 

[love]

Unlike other creatures on earth who follow natural instinct as their guide, mankind has an infinite ability to do evil. God had to implement rules for man to follow (or not). Religious laws have been passed down for generations and this has shaped society as we know it.

 

[painted wolf]

All social animals have a sence of morality. There are rules that you need to have to live in a group.

In my faith was our animal brothers/sisters who taught us how to live. Wolves taught us to live together in a group, Bever taught us how to build good homes and so on.

wa:do

 

[wizanda]

Its because you get square babies...so I was told