An athiest world = a better world.

In my other thread about how the world would be, if Christianity was classed as a mental illness, some Christians proposed the view that without religion, society would cease to function due to a lack of rules/morals that are found in religion. Some proposed that religion is the only thing keeping us from killing each other. This is a very popular view of Christians that I have heard many times in my life.

I think the view is incredibly stupid. I have given the previous example of great apes displaying moral values above and beyond those of humans. And these apes have no concept of god. But I think the following article demonstrates the point that god is not needed for morals, more than my example.

I hope you all find it as enlightening as I did.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

God would be an atheist: Why can't we all be Japanese?
Religion fosters bad behavior

COLUMN By MARTIN FOREMAN
From God would be an atheist...
First published Nov. 12, 2005

Several weeks ago, a ground-breaking study on religious belief and social well-being was published in the Journal of Religion & Society. Comparing 18 prosperous democracies from the U.S. to New Zealand, author Gregory S Paul quietly demolished the myth that faith strengthens society.

Drawing on a wide range of studies to cross-match faith � measured by belief in God and acceptance of evolution � with homicide and sexual behavior, Paul found that secular societies have lower rates of violence and teenage pregnancy than societies where many people profess belief in God.

Top of the class, in both atheism and good behavior, come the Japanese. Over eighty percent accept evolution and fewer than ten percent are certain that God exists. Despite its size � over a hundred million people � Japan is one of the least crime-prone countries in the world. It also has the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy of any developed nation.

(Teenage pregnancy has less tragic consequences than violence but it is usually unwanted, and it is frequently associated with deprivation among both mothers and children. In general, it is a Bad Thing.)

Next in line are the Norwegians, British, Germans and Dutch. At least sixty percent accept evolution as a fact and fewer than one in three are convinced that there is a deity. There is little teenage pregnancy , although the Brits, with over 40 pregnancies per 1,000 girls a year, do twice as badly as the others. Homicide rates are also low -- around 1-2 victims per 100,000 people a year.

At the other end of the scale comes America. Over 50 percent of Americans believe in God, and only 40 percent accept some form of evolution (many believe it had a helping hand from the Deity). The U.S. has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy and homicide rates are at least five times greater than in Europe and ten times higher than in Japan.

All this information points to a strong correlation between faith and antisocial behavior -- a correlation so strong that there is good reason to suppose that religious belief does more harm than good.

At first glance that is a preposterous suggestion, given that religions preach non-violence and sexual restraint. However, close inspection reveals a different story. Faith tends to weaken rather than strengthen people�s ability to participate in society. That makes it less likely they will respect social customs and laws.

All believers learn that God holds them responsible for their actions. So far so good, but for many, belief absolves them of all other responsibilities. Consciously or subconsciously, those who are "born again" or "chosen" have diminished respect for others who do not share their sect or their faith. Convinced that only the Bible offers "truth", they lose their intellectual curiosity and their ability to reason. Their priority becomes not the world they live in but themselves.

The more people prioritize themselves rather than those around them, the weaker society becomes and the greater the likelihood of antisocial behavior. Hence gun laws which encourage Americans to see each other not as fellow human beings who deserve protection, but as potential aggressors who deserve to die. And hence a health care system which looks after the wealthy rather than the ill.

As for sex� Faith encourages ignorance rather than responsible behavior. In other countries, sex education includes contraception, reducing the risk of unwanted pregnancies. Such an approach recognizes that young people have the right to make their own choices and helps them make decisions that benefit society as a whole. In America faith-driven abstinence programs deny them that right -- "As a Christian I will only help you if you do what I say". The result is soaring rates of unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.

Abstinence programs rest on the same weak intellectual foundation as creationism and intelligent design. Faith discourages unprejudiced analysis. Reasoning is subverted to rationalization that supports rather than questions assumptions. The result is a self-contained system that maintains an internal logic, no matter how absurd to outside observers.

The constitutional wall that theoretically separates church and state is irrelevant. Religion has overwhelmed the nation to permeate all public discussion. Look no further than Gary Bauer, a man who in any other western nation would be dismissed as a fanatic and who in America is interviewed deferentially on prime time television.

Despite all its fine words, religion has brought in its wake little more than violence, prejudice and sexual disease. True morality is found elsewhere. As UK Guardian columnist George Monbiot concluded in his review of Gregory Paul�s study, "if you want people to behave as Christians advocate, you should tell them that God does not exist."

I might express that another way. The flip side of Monbiot's argument is that God would be an atheist...

Martin Foreman is the author of "God would be an atheist," a syndicated print column. For information about syndicating this column, visit www.godwouldbeanatheist.com to contact the author.

Original article link: http://americanhumanist.org/hnn/archives/index.php?id=219&article=7

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Japan is a dying nation. Children have suicide pacts on the internet and their population is mostly old. Atheism = dead society

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Also I'd like to make the point, that the fact that the athiest countries listed may have other reasons beyond their athiest view point for being better than countries with a religious view point, is irrelevent. It does not matter if these countries have lower crime rates etc... due to being richer or whatever.

The point I am making by sharing this article, is that Christians have proposed that without God a functional and moral society is impossible.

This has been demonstrated to be false. In fact a society without god has shown that it has the ability to be better than a society with god.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Er, some Christians, I think you mean. Let's not generalize, shall we?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I've yet to see any gripping statistical analysis of the process, but I suspect there are too many societal, cultural and individual confounding variables anyway.

 

lol Japan a dying nation because kids are committing suicide.

Wow I love your logic... brilliant.

 

in the Athiest world is better in the long run

despite the pain to get there

 

Like I said confounding variables do not matter. The only variable that matters is whether or not there is religous belief. That's the only variable that needs to be shown to result in either a society that is capable of working or not.

That is all that is required to disprove the hypothesis that a godless society can function and be moral.

 

And so can a godly one. It might be more accurate to say that some societies of either type can function, since both philosophies have their bad eggs.

 

To further make this point, take a confounding variable like all these countries being rich or some being communist. Those variables do not detract from the FACT that they function without religion.

You might say that without money and without communism (the confounding variables) they will no longer function. But that does not matter. Because the mere fact that there is the possibility of other means than religion in causing a society to be moral and functional, is all that is needed to disprove the hypothesis that without religion society won't function or be moral.

 

it takes time for a godless society to grow

I have the opinion that religion civilized us 1000yrs to soon

 

Save the bold font: it doesn't pass.

I agree with your hypothesis. I merely wish to make the point that the converse hypothesis - that a 'godly' society cannot or ought not to function because Christianity specifically could be considered a mental disorder - is also not true. What happens is that historical and societal conditions render the value of any religious position moot with reference to "morality", whatever that might be coded as. I think this a more accurate way to express the issue, and one satisfactory to all parties.

 

And I love your reading comprehension. The replacement rate in Japan is about 1.2. Which is the rate below that of a living society. For every two people who die, 1.2 is born. Out of which the prime pastime for the young is internet suicide pacts. You do the math.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_Japan

 

That is not the "prime pastime". Why the propaganda?

 

GeoffP

Firstly sorry about the bold font, it wasn't actually in reply to you, I just wanted to post that with my original post but I was too late as the replies stacked up and so I bolded it so people would pay attention to it.

Anyway are you saying that a religious society can be as moral as an athiest society? Because I wouldn't agree with you if that's what you are saying. Religious societies have always demonstrated violence. When you have a religion that preaches violence, you'll always have violence as a result. In an athiest society the message can be preached that no violence in any way is acceptable. When that message is preached then the result logically has to be better than a society which is founded on the preaching of violence.

 

S.A.M

So you are saying that an overpopulated country, which is currently no longer growing in population is a bad thing?

I think you are.... which makes you someone who isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

 

Oh: that's quite all right then. Sorry.

Actually, that's what I'm saying. Many secular societies have also demonstrated violence, and staggering violence: the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist Laos and Cambodia, and so forth. I think the variance in your proposal swamps the mean.

 

Heh. You think they want to reduce their population? The government keeps telling the women to "do their duties" Obviously, they are not interested.

 

Curious: so a theistic society with greater than replacement - keeping in mind the fact of the natural limitation of resources planetwide - is somehow inherently better? How would a theistic society inculcate successful reproduction? What would it do in the event that women were "not interested"? Is it tied to education, incentive, or enforcement?

 

Geoffp

I don't disagree with what you are saying. But I'm just making the point that in a perfect athiest world 100% morality is possible. In a perfect religious world, due to religions preaching violence, 100% morality is impossible. Which makes me say that we are better off with athiesm, at least there morality stands a better chance.

 

agreed