Only Atheists can be Truly Moral

[Aboli]

There is much talk about whether or not Atheists can be moral people, for we don't have such things as the Bible to guide us, but think of this:

An Atheist and a Christian (or anyone of any religion-- i'll use 'Christian' here just to keep it simple) both donate the same amount to the same charity. I argue that the charitable action of the Atheist is more moral than that of the Christian, because the Atheist did so without any incentive or motivation.

The Christian has heaven to look forward to, so in truth, no good thing they do goes un-rewarded. The Atheist on the other hand, doesn't believe in an afterlife, and so they donate genuinely expecting nothing in return.

Does not the expectation of reimbursement negate the morality of an action?

 

[Skwim]

In a sense it certainly does. Being charitable out of compassion for others is more virtuous than being charitable so as to help one self get into heaven.

.

 

[ERLOS]

There is much talk about whether or not Atheists can be moral people, for we don't have such things as the Bible to guide us, but think of this:

An Atheist and a Christian (or anyone of any religion-- i'll use 'Christian' here just to keep it simple) both donate the same amount to the same charity. I argue that the charitable action of the Atheist is more moral than that of the Christian, because the Atheist did so without any incentive or motivation.

The Christian has heaven to look forward to, so in truth, no good thing they do goes un-rewarded. The Atheist on the other hand, doesn't believe in an afterlife, and so they donate genuinely expecting nothing in return.

Does not the expectation of reimbursement negate the morality of an action?

Yawn ...

Why just Christians?

What sbout Buddhists? Hindus? Taoist? Moslems?

Why do so many atheists come to a faith website? Its so funny. In fact the majority here seem to be atheists. So you'll find yourself in good company to air intelligent superiority over the one-third of the world population who are Christian. Never mind all the other believers of all the countless other faiths and religions?

 

[Skwim]

Yawn ...

A little too close to home, eh.

.

 

[Sir Doom]

I like how the atheist in your example was designed to be thoroughly altruistic. It does not indicate a bias on your part at all. Oh wait...

#1 plenty of Christians will tell you that nothing good you do is good enough to earn heaven you need Jesus for that (according to them) Christians are encouraged to be charitable regardless.

#2 there are tons of completely non-religious reasons to give to charity that are totally selfish. Just because you've blissfully disincluded them in your example doesn't plant a well-deserved high-horse underneath you.

#3 if being rewarded negates charity then it has never happened once. A smile from the recipient is a reward. The esteem of your peers for being such a generous person is another. The tax break you are entitled to. The list goes on and on.

 

[ERLOS]

In a sense it certainly does. Being charitable out of compassion for others is more virtuous than being charitable so as to help one self get into heaven.

.

Like Mother Teresa, you mean? Or the Catholic missionaries working for AIDS and leprosy patients in Africa?

 

[ERLOS]

I like how the atheist in your example was designed to be thoroughly altruistic. It does not indicate a bias on your part at all. Oh wait...

#1 plenty of Christians will tell you that nothing good you do is good enough to earn heaven you need Jesus for that (according to them) Christians are encouraged to be charitable regardless.

#2 there are tons of completely non-religious reasons to give to charity that are totally selfish. Just because you've blissfully disincluded them in your example doesn't plant a well-deserved high-horse underneath you.

#3 if being rewarded negates charity then it has never happened once. A smile from the recipient is a reward. The esteem of your peers for being such a generous person is another. The tax break you are entitled to. The list goes on and on.

Thank you

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yawn ...

Why just Christians?

What sbout Buddhists? Hindus? Taoist? Moslems?

To be fair, the OP did address that. From the OP:

"An Atheist and a Christian (or anyone of any religion-- i'll use 'Christian' here just to keep it simple)..."

Why do so many atheists come to a faith website?

This isn't a "faith" website. It's a forum for discussing and debating religion.

Its so funny. In fact the majority here seem to be atheists.

Perhaps that's could be because atheists just tend to be more capable at discussing and debating religion than theists generally are?

So you'll find yourself in good company to air intelligent superiority over the one-third of the world population who are Christian. Never mind all the other believers of all the countless other faiths and religions?

They did acknowledge this in the OP.

 

[Mock Turtle]

There is evidence that the religious are no more moral or generous than non-believers - try searching for such. Hardly a surprise though.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Like Mother Teresa, you mean?

The woman who opened homes for dying and destitute women and then often provided them with little or no actual treatment because she believed their suffering was a gift, used charitable funds intended for medical aid for missionary work instead, and was regularly accused of mishandling charitable donations?

 

[ERLOS]

The woman who opened homes for dying and destitute women and then often provided them with little or no actual treatment because she believed their suffering was a gift, used charitable funds intended for medical aid for missionary work instead, and was regularly accused of mishandling charitable donations?

Oh she was such a wicked woman. On the strength of a single highly biased article by a TRAVEL writer in a new-atheist magazine?

https://newint.org/features/2014/09/01/mother-teresa-torture-kolkata

I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.’ This clearly indicates that Mother Teresa and, by extension, Missionaries of Charity believe that suffering enhances holiness.

Which obviously means the womsn who dedicated her life to picking up the outcast and dying human debris from the worst diseased streets in the world so they could die with dignity did it to enjoy watching them suffer? How's that for utter crap?

Get on

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Oh she was such a wicked woman. On the strength of a single highly biased article by a TRAVEL writer in a new-atheist magazine?

Get on

Actually, it's on the strength of multiple investigations by several journalists, independent health organization surveys and assessments carried out by world health organizations and charity watchdogs.

https://www.timeshighereducation.co...76802.article?storyCode=176802&sectioncode=40
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(94)92353-1/abstract
https://web.archive.org/web/2016040...30301-mother-teresa-anything-but-a-saint.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/04/mother-teresas-legacy-under-cloud-as-sainthood-nears/
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...s-should-she-really-be-made-a-saint/94365.htm
http://www.fmh-child.org/Stern.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

 

[ERLOS]

Actually, it's on the strength of multiple investigations by several journalists, independent health organization surveys and assessments carried out by world health organizations and charity watchdogs.

https://www.timeshighereducation.co...76802.article?storyCode=176802&sectioncode=40
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(94)92353-1/abstract
https://web.archive.org/web/2016040...30301-mother-teresa-anything-but-a-saint.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/04/mother-teresas-legacy-under-cloud-as-sainthood-nears/
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...s-should-she-really-be-made-a-saint/94365.htm
http://www.fmh-child.org/Stern.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

Right. She wasn't a perfect human being. These are debates about her cannonization. In the process of cannonization there's a process called the devils-advocate to investigate less attractive aspects of the proposed saint's life. No one's perfect. However she was cannonized. That was the decision: that the immense good outweighed the bad.

Whatever. You guys hate anything to do with God or religion, especially anything to do with Catholics. I haven't all day to read through all that stuff and debate crap.

 

[ERLOS]

What I'm saying: how do you have so much time in your life to spend discussing this God you don't believe in? Weird ...

 

[Sir Doom]

We're discussing charity, actually.

 

[ERLOS]

Superior atheist charity to evil 'religious' (especially Christian) charity?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Right. She wasn't a perfect human being. These are debates about her cannonization. In the process of cannonization there's a process called the devils-advocate to investigate less attractive aspects of the proposed saint's life. No one's perfect. However she was cannonized. That was the decision: that the immense good outweighed the bad.

The question isn't whether she's perfect. Your brought her up as an example of a selfless and charitable religious person. I informed you that she wasn't entirely selfless or charitable.

Whatever. You guys hate anything to do with God or religion, especially anything to do with Catholics. I haven't all day to read through all that stuff and debate crap.

Then why are you on a debate forum?

 

[Sir Doom]

Superior atheist charity to evil 'religious' (especially Christian) charity?

Yes, the OP's self-indulgent fantasy version of charity and it's validity.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What I'm saying: how do you have so much time in your life to spend discussing this God you don't believe in? Weird ...

Because the vast majority of people in the world DO believe in a God, and many of those people's beliefs play a major role in informing their actions, and a lot of those actions affect everybody - including atheists. If this was a forum dedicated to debating conspiracy theories or aliens, would you level the same criticism at people who frequent those forums specifically to refute arguments made in favor of conspiracy theories or aliens?

 

[Frater Sisyphus]

The OP kind of misses the point of both Theism and Atheism