Increase of Atheists around the world, increase of crime any coincidence?

[DarkLight]

Question here for the Catholics:

Is morality simply reducible to what God commands; i.e. that for example, torture is wrong but God could decide that torture is right and it would become so? Where in that case ethics stems purely from the Divine will and has no further root?

Or is morality grounded in other aspects, such as human flourishing, to which God in his goodness and as our Creator provides directions? In a case like that morality would still be grounded in God, as he created us such that our purpose and goods are what they are, but it would not flow simply from command. And it could be determined (as indeed Aquinas thought, among many others) in such a case without reference to God, by a proper understanding of the nature of the created world?

 

[BT3241]

Crime is committed for 3 reasons , power , money or sex. The obsessive materialistic lives that some people live in today’s world doesn’t help either. Morality has also evolved what was once unthinkable is now acceptable in many situations and it will continue to evolve. How far will it go I have no idea but its been moving fast over the last 30 years.

 

[openmind77]

The Holy Prophets rightly warned us these wicked days will be just the begin and to increase.

Before any Governments and Law firms were Established…

I also know we as believers are not innocent either.

Although there was a slight increase in crime in in 2016-2017, there has been a steady decrease in the crime rate since 1990. When exactly did this increase in Atheists and and the corresponding increase of crime take place?

Loading…

www.statista.com

 

[PennyinCanada]

Morality has also evolved what was once unthinkable is now acceptable in many situations and it will continue to evolve. How far will it go I have no idea but its been moving fast over the last 30 years.

I was thinking of how much changed since I was a kid. A lot. That could be it’s own thread.

 

[englands123]

Crime is committed for 3 reasons , power , money or sex. The obsessive materialistic lives that some people live in today’s world doesn’t help either. Morality has also evolved what was once unthinkable is now acceptable in many situations and it will continue to evolve. How far will it go I have no idea but its been moving fast over the last 30 years.

I would 100% agree with your post. What is acceptable today was not excepted in years gone by. All I can do is pray these higher authorities keep to a common good.

Sorry if I offended any Atheists my assumption was based on my own opinion. Without stats.

 

[Spaten]

it is definitely premeditated so i don’t see where your issue is.

But not unlawful. At least it is not is certain societies.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

So do you think that Dawkins is talking about the universe’s indifference to you and me or is he talking about personal existence?

in a universe, without good or evil, there is no personal good or evil. everyone gets to define their own individual code of conduct.

First up we have the Golden Rule. It’s universally accepted and endorsed by the Son of God. Do unto others as you would have them do to you. Let’s keep it in mind. Plus the fact that unless we are psycopathic, we all have the ability to empathise with others.

Now as to good and bad, let’s investigate. Do I want to be ill? No. Do I want to get robbed? No. Do I want to be mugged? No. Do I want to be hungry all the time? No. So that was straightforward. Being ill is bad for me. Likewise being robbed etc. All bad for me personally. Now check the top of the page and we can see that the rule says that if I don’t want to be robbed then I shouldn’t rob other people. If I don’t want to be hungry all the time then I shouldn’t willfully allow others to be hungry. And we know this because we can empathise with others. So if being robbed is bad for me then it’s going to be bad for someone else. It’s universally bad.

Again, that’s pretty straightforward. We now have a moral rule that says: ‘Don’t steal’. And the reason is that if I work hard to own something I value and it is taken from me, then that is bad for me and we can see it would be bad for everyone else as well. So I must not steal from someone else.

And as it happens, that truism helps us form societies and maintain them. The truism, that moral code, is accepted by everyone. And it has evolved precisely because of that. The more people who agree that stealing is wrong, the better chance there is of forming like-minded groups of people who are able to survive better than were they individuals trying to survive on their own.

And what about those who feel they are exempt from such rules. Well we have also evolved shame, a sense of justice, righteous anger, guilt and a tendency to punish transgressors. So people who steal risk the righteous anger of those who don’t and risk punishment. Notwithstanding the possible guilt and shame of being held up as an unwanted member of society.

So, upant…all one needs is an ability to empathise and an understanding and acceptance of the Golden Rule and one can formulate any number of moral arguments. Which, as it generally turns out, align perfectly with what the Catholic church teaches. So you actually have a choice. You can obey the moral rules as they have developed for the good of society for the above reasons or you can simply say: ‘I’ll follow that moral code because that’s what the church teaches’. But at least now you’ll know why it is taught.

Cont’d…

 

[Freddy]

…Cont’d

And please bear in mind that if we have a disagreement about a moral matter then we are free to discuss it and give the reasons why each of us holds to our own position. And if the church has its reasons then you are free to use them. Unless they are simply religious reasons (God says it is so, for example). Then we must part ways. Unless you have good secular reasons for any given position then for obvious reasons I will not be able to accept them and will ignore them.

Otherwise…we can discuss moral views on an equal footing.

 

[FiveLinden]

If I am a dictator controlling a large swath of population for what I see are my large-scale political ends, and you are merely an accumulation of proteins, minerals and biochemicals without an inherent value (to me) what is to stop me from killing you and others like you? Research the histories of China, Russia, Cambodia, Cuba, etc., etc. Perhaps you can provide an answer that would convince someone like Pol Pot or Josef Stalin that they ought to reconsider how they treat other human beings under their control.

The problem for your argument is that dictators wth religious belief have behaved in the same way. Although I would not call him a dictator, Joshua was willing to kill every man, woman,child and animal (bar one) in Jericho. His reason? He believed God told him it was right.

 

[Freddy]

BT3241:

Morality has also evolved what was once unthinkable is now acceptable in many situations and it will continue to evolve. How far will it go I have no idea but its been moving fast over the last 30 years.

I was thinking of how much changed since I was a kid. A lot. That could be it’s own thread.

Some things are definitely worse. But it’s a two way street. There’s less homophobia. Less drinking and driving. Less racism. Less mysogyny. Less abortions. Less murders. Less alcohol consumption.

 

[PennyinCanada]

Less abortions? They weren’t legal when I was a kid.
It wasn’t that long ago.

 

[Freddy]

Less abortions? They weren’t legal when I was a kid.
It wasn’t that long ago.

BT mentioned a time period of 30 years. Roe v Wade was '73.

 

[jzea1992]

Sad. Most everyone in my life is Godless

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

What is acceptable today was not excepted in years gone by. All I can do is pray these higher authorities keep to a common good.

Sorry if I offended any Atheists my assumption was based on my own opinion. Without stats.

I don’t speak for anyone but me, but apology accepted.
The morality “problem” is practically a common trope at this point so I don’t get too worked up anymore.

But I do see an opportunity in this for Christians and atheist to better understand each other. Speaking for myself once again, the morality “problem” suggest we are working from drastically different frameworks that yield similar results (murder, theft, dishonesty, etc = bad).

Besides, isn’t “objective morality” actually subjective in practice? There are many interpretations of God’s will wrt moral issues. Not just denominations but the opinions of a denominations members which often differ from their church.

 

[Sarcelle]

Atheists can have an individual code of conduct, you call morals, but they choose what to base it on and can change it when they want.

So can Christians.

They just change how they interpret Scripture in order for them to justify what they want.

Think of the slave holders in the Confederate south.

 

[stavros388]

A book I am attempting to get through for a second time (great book, but long and fairly dense), The Better Angels of our Nature by Steven Pinker, is relevant to this discussion and may be of interest to some of you.

1-Sentence-Summary: The Better Angels Of Our Nature illustrates why we live in the most peaceful time ever in history, by looking at what motivates us to behave violently, how these motivators are outweighed by our tendencies towards a peaceful life and which major shifts in history caused this global reduction in crime.

Loading…

fourminutebooks.com

Great discussion. Carry on!

 

[Freddy]

A book I am attempting to get through for a second time (great book, but long and fairly dense), The Better Angels of our Nature by Steven Pinker, is relevant to this discussion and may be of interest to some of you.

1-Sentence-Summary: The Better Angels Of Our Nature illustrates why we live in the most peaceful time ever in history, by looking at what motivates us to behave violently, how these motivators are outweighed by our tendencies towards a peaceful life and which major shifts in history caused this global reduction in crime.

Great discussion. Carry on!

Well worth the effort if you can get through it.

In passing I am often bemused by those who, not having read the book, automatically deny the premise. As you say, it is somewhat dense in that it uses a lot of facts and figures to prove the case. But so often someone will posts WWII causalty figues for example as a means to counter Pinker when he has obviously included those in his calculations.

It seems that doom and destruction and a downward spriral into immorality and violence serves better the purpose of many Christians.

 

[upant]

First up we have the Golden Rule. It’s universally accepted and endorsed by the Son of God. Do unto others as you would have them do to you. Let’s keep it in mind.

we don’t first have to have a golden rule. there is no good or evil in a random existence. you need to overcome this hurdle first. everything else is just majority rules.

again, you think sex outside of marriage is okay, I don’t. who defines who is right? we both can’t be right. we both can’t say we are moral in this issue if we believe the opposite thing. my rule has been around since biblical times, yours has changed over time. that is how atheistic morals work? they can change any time.

Otherwise…we can discuss moral views on an equal footing.

you haven’t established that footing except for societal norm which keeps shifting, adultery, child-sacrifice, etc

what gives your morals their authority to be held. do all atheists hold the same morals? what happens if they break them? who arbitrates differences? who holds them accountable?

Now as to good and bad, let’s investigate. Do I want to be ill? No. Do I want to get robbed? No. Do I want to be mugged? No. Do I want to be hungry all the time?

it doesn’t matter what you want, what does the other guy decides he wants? is it okay for him to do these things? in a random existence, yes it is. there is no reason for him not to. who decides between you and him?

It’s universally bad.

why? the majority doesn’t rule in chaos.

We now have a moral rule that says: ‘Don’t steal’.

you have your rule, the prison is full of people who don’t subscribe to it

if good was innate in us and bad was the deviant behavior the world would be a better place.

 

[upant]

But not unlawful. At least it is not is certain societies.

it is against God’s law.

man’s law doesn’t matter

societal norm makes it acceptable here and now but unless one repents …

but there is hope, Jesus is the answer not the false morals of a fallen world. you can’t be good enough on your own to get to heaven.

So can Christians.

They just change how they interpret Scripture in order for them to justify what they want.

Think of the slave holders in the Confederate south.

Peter saw Jesus work miracles and still denied him 3 times. just because Christians have access to the right answers doesn’t mean they will pass the test.

the difference is in the judgment, the Christian will have to answer for it

now, I do believe the atheist will also have to answer for it, but for the sake of this thread…

 

[Freddy]

we don’t first have to have a golden rule. there is no good or evil in a random existence. you need to overcome this hurdle first. everything else is just majority rules.

again, you think sex outside of marriage is okay, I don’t. who defines who is right? we both can’t be right. we both can’t say we are moral in this issue if we believe the opposite thing. my rule has been around since biblical times, yours has changed over time. that is how atheistic morals work? they can change any time.

you haven’t established that footing except for societal norm which keeps shifting, adultery, child-sacrifice, etc

what gives your morals their authority to be held. do all atheists hold the same morals? what happens if they break them? who arbitrates differences? who holds them accountable?

it doesn’t matter what you want, what does the other guy decides he wants? is it okay for him to do these things? in a random existence, yes it is. there is no reason for him not to. who decides between you and him?

Freddy:

It’s universally bad.

why? the majority doesn’t rule in chaos.

We now have a moral rule that says: ‘Don’t steal’.

you have your rule, the prison is full of people who don’t subscribe to it

if good was innate in us and bad was the deviant behavior the world would be a better place.

We do have the Golden Rule. I accept it and so do you. So we can each use it as a basis for deciding morality.

And of course there is good and bad in everyone’s life. And the vast majority or experiences are something we can agree on. Illness is bad. Health is good. Constant hunger is bad. Freedom from hunger is good. Education is good. Ignorance is bad. Obviously there will be aspects of life on which we disagree but let’s concentrate on the huge percentage that we go agree on.

So based on the Golden Rule and the fact that we agree on what is good and bad we can investigate any moral position and determine whether that moral position is correct. And we can all do this. So if we, as a society, determine that stealing is wrong then we can discuss if we need to put in place punishments to discourage those who choose to ignore that aspect of morality.

So it’s not ‘my’ morals. It’s the morals with which we both agree. And if there are differences of opinion then we discuss those differences and see if we can’t solve them.

And please bear in mind the comments once made by a US president:

‘Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to X for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or [invoke] God’s will. I have to explain why X violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.’

Wise words indeed.