Atheism and morality

[Badassbab]

Kasz216 said:

Badassbab said:

Not sure what your getting at. As in say human rights organisations such as Amnesty International with over a million members (including myself) are not 'moral'? There are thousands of charities with no religious affliation nor will they restrict volunteers and workers to atheists for non religious moral reasons.

Are you seriously suggesting atheists should do what they shouldn't do and form a charity with a restrictive membership based on professing atheism? There are plenty of atheist groups one can join which up dates members what atheists consider to be immoral religious teachings. As pointed out numerous times, morality is subjective and evolving.

You couldn't of missed the point any harder if you tried.

Likely because your in "angry self defense mode" rather then "lets look at the numbers and causes" mode.

I'll try and explain again, though it'll be hard to do in a different way.  Please try and look at it from an objective viewpoint and don't assume anything.

1) On average (note: average)  religious people are more likely to give money, blood and effort to both secular and nonsecular charities.  If you are currently religious, there is a much higher chance you are going to donate to charity and give blood/donate time.

2) We need to find a reason for why this would be true.  My hypothesis is that the church works as a large community that peer pressures people into doing the right thing.

Lots of people go to churches who may have moderate to no interest in helping people.

Almost no one is going to join amnesty international unless they REALLY want to give to charity.  Also, you don't have to be catholic to donate time or money to a catholic charity.

As a LOT of charity people will tell you, there is a LOT of untapped money and potential of people who want to be charitable... the only trick is, you need to find ways to coax it out of people.

So what atheism should do if it grows, is find a way to create a "Church like" community like churches, that draw in everybody and then individually asks for help and support.

The point is, getting people to go to a charity event... who wouldn't normally go to a charity event... it's pretty much the biggest dilema charities have had since... well existance.

Religion is much better at in general "reigning in morality" just based on the fact that it's a meeting of the community.

 

I think it's likely that rather then the particular religion, since religion doesn't seem to matter.  All that does matters is that you practice it.  Statistically that is.

So let's see your arguing your point about morality based on...giving to charity?  Ok fine giving to charity is a very noble cause but you can't base your argument soley on that. It's not even a fair comparison as there are billions more people who profess to a religion than atheism. And morality is subjective. The Catholic Church telling it's followers not to use contraception is immoral in my books as it is causing unneccesary deaths. I'm not sure why you highlighted the Amnesty International point in bold. Why did you do that?