"As an atheist, you must live an ethical life."

[Zenlitened]

Edited per DU copyright rules. Please do read the entire piece at: http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_3164757

As an atheist, you must live an ethical life

Scott G. Morris
Salt Lake Tribune, October 29, 2005

(snip)

Understand that I am an atheist by conviction, not by choice. That is, observation and study have led me to what seems to me the inescapable conclusion that god and religion are artifacts, created by people, and, in fact, altered and recreated regularly as convenience requires.

(snip)

... If you believe in a god, then whatever evil you do, there is a power that can fix it. Whatever harm your actions cause, there is someone or something that can make it right. And that's fine.

But if you are an atheist, then you alone are completely responsible for the results of your actions. If you commit an act of vandalism and ruin some beautiful and fragile piece of nature, there is no one to mitigate the damage. If you harm someone, even inadvertently, you can't take comfort in the fact that god will make it right for that person, in this life or the next.

As an atheist, you must live an ethical life. There is no other choice.

(snip)

---

Scott G. Morris is recently retired from the fire-alarm industry, where he was a manager, designer and salesman. A lifelong resident of Utah, he presently holds the jobs of husband, father and grandfather.

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_3164757

[A HERETIC I AM]

1. I couldn't agree more

well written. Thanks for sharing that piece

[shenmue]

2. Nicely done

Thanks for giving us the article. :7

[BlueEyedSon]

3. K&R....although you should probably edit down for copyright purposes

[Zenlitened]

9. Yoiks! You're right.

I was so pleased to see the piece, I forgot all about that. Done. :hi:

[papau]

4. Add "People may use atheism" in addition to "People may use religion" and

I totally agree.

Or if we all agree that atheism is a faith - a belief - indeed a religion, then I agree with the post as written.

[BlueEyedSon]

6. How does one use the absence of something?

That just doesn't make logical sense!

[papau]

8. As the same logical crutch - the "I AM RIGHT" crutch that one falls

back on, per the original poster implication of what those that have faith "may" do - when facing unknowns.

[Zenlitened]

11. The author does address that...

... in a way that seem more in harmony with the position implied by BlueEyedSon's question, above.

...athiests are good people or bad people because of how they are, as people, regardless of any religious question.

[BlueEyedSon]

13. Exactly.

[ihaveaquestion]

12. Atheism is a religion?

Because someone has a 'belief' (in this case that there is no god) then the fact of their having a belief means that there is a religion associated with that belief?

Is this what is called religious "logic?"

[BlueEyedSon]

14. Atheism is not a belief or a religion, i believe!

[Zenlitened]

17. Oy. That discussion has been hashed out at least a million times.

And the "atheism is faith" meme still keeps getting inserted into the dialog. Then, in a short time, as the "it's a faith!" crowd gets increasingly desperate and nasty, the thread gets locked. That's the logic, it seems to me.

Run! Save yourself (in a secular, non-theistic way) while there's still time! :D

[costas254]

19. Atheism is as much a religion as baldness is a hair colour, imo. n/t

[newyawker99]

45. Hi costas254!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Zenlitened]

48. Welcome to DU. :)

:hi:

[costas254]

55. thank you both

:hi:

[azureblue]

24. religion & philosophy

You must ask, is Taoism / Zen a religion, or is it a philosophy, to get your answer.

[ihaveaquestion]

30. Depends on the definition of "religion"

If a religion must have god(s) to be defined as "religion," then Taoism and Zen don't qualify. If what they describe in their writings is interpreted as descriptions of "higher power" and this is enough to define them as "religion," then I suppose they can be called religions.

Personally I relate to Taoism much more than any of the theistic religions I've been exposed to. Then again, I can see where the deeper theistic and spiritual aspects of Judaism and Catholicism actually approach the Tao in their understanding of the universe.

[Toots]

38. I bet Bush* knows the answer to that after all his favorite philosopher

is Jesus.... :crazy:

[dogfacedboy]

50. Belief alone doesn't constitute a religion.

I believe in evolution, for example, because there is scientific evidence that supports it. Does that make me a member of The First Congregation of Darwin? Of course not.

[manic expression]

62. religion doesn't have to be organized n/t

[mondo joe]

21. Atheism is a faith like barefoot is a kind of shoe.

You are in error.

Atheism is the absence of a belief or faith.

[Zenlitened]

25. "Atheism is a faith like barefoot is a kind of shoe."

:spray:

:rofl:

[jonnyblitz]

33. LMFAO!!!

SLAM!!!!! not that it takes much effort...:crazy:

[leesa]

53. Unless it's a belief that there is no God...playing with semantics

[mondo joe]

56. Is belief that there are no fairies inhabiting trees a religion?

Do you believe there are no elves living at the North Pole? Is that a religion?

[manic expression]

64. However...

people who believe there ARE elves living at the North Pole does not constitute a religion either.

However, both groups (people who believe and don't believe in elves at the North Pole) constitute a philosophy on elves at the North Pole.

[jonnyblitz]

65. LOL..give up..

there is obviously no freakin hope for some people. they are determined that everybody has to worship something even if it is nothing...:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[manic expression]

68. Well...

When I say atheism can be considered a religion, I do not mean it as though any worship has to be involved. Religion constitutes a set of beliefs on the topic of divinity. Atheism falls into that category.

By the way, I use such a categorization to my advantage when RWers say that atheism should not be put on the same level as religions and not be given the same respect.

[manic expression]

63. do you consider black a color?

what about white?

[BiggJawn]

23. We will NOT agree.

"Or if we all agree that atheism is a faith - a belief - indeed a religion, then I agree with the post as written."

No fucking way, and we've hashed this argument out ad nauseum.

this "Atheism is a religion" bullshit is a pry-bar used by the Dominionists to try and get Rationality and secularism granted the same "Persona Non Grata" status in the public realm as their myth is. Or barring THAT, they want Religion granted access into our laws. Just like the Taliban.

"WAHH!!! The ATHEISTS can put their ATHEIST religion into Government, but we're not allowed to put GAWD in Government! Wah! It's NOT FAIR!"

[Taxloss]

46. Sigh.

Is an empty shop a bookstore because it contains no books?

[catbert836]

72. I would post a rant...

But I think you've learned your lesson.

[Delphinus]

5. Wonderful and true statement.

Too bad most religions don't call for living an ethical life.

[G_j]

16. the Dalai Lama being a notable exception n/t

[PsychoDad]

70. I thought they all did.

It's the followers who elect out of it. Selective morality.

[Epiphany4z]

7. I agree

and find it funny I have nearly had an all brawl with a Christian friend because she could not accept that we shared many of the same values and yet I didn't believe in a god. I was just in denial don't you know...

[Zenlitened]

22. I once had it in my head that my cousin didn't believe in god....

... because he's Jewish.

In my defense, I'll add that I was five years old at the time, and being raised Lutheran. I just figured, I guess, that if he didn't believe in "my" god, he must not believe in any god at all.

So when he told me, as we were bickering over the sort of things kids bicker over, when he said "I swear to god!" I didn't believe him, because his oath just must be meaningless.

Again, let the jury note I was five years old. I'd like to think I've experienced some brain development since then. :D

[Christa]

10. Great article!

One of my colleagues were overheard telling somebody he could not understand that I am an atheist and at the same time an ethical person :think:
It does not mean that just because we don't have an ancient book to follow or don't believe in a vengeful cruel pie in the sky that we have no morals and norms to live by.

[Zenlitened]

15. It's amazing, isn't it? That grown men and women just have never pondered

... that it might be possible to be a decent human being without the whole god-thing, the fear of punishment, et cetera et cetera.

Crazy. It blows my mind sometimes.

:)

P.S. A belated welcome to DU. :hi:

[G_j]

26. what of the 'belief' in cause & effect

or Karma? What goes around comes around etc.
In this 'system' the only 'punishment' is of ones own making.
The belief in Karma is often associated with reincarnation but not necessarily. Some see it as 'divine' law, but others see it simply as 'natural' law. Karma may be a 'belief' but it can tend to feel more 'logical' to some than the punishment of a pissed off parent/god.

[Zenlitened]

28. I think karma may fall under the heading of "wishful thinking."

Sort of a psychological salve we apply when we see people getting away with nasty behavior.

Or a more high-minded way of saying "serves the bastard right" when we see that same nasty person getting smacked-down.

[G_j]

31. that is a limited synopsis

the law of cause and effect happens in the physical world all the time. For instance, global warming may in the end destroy us (as opposed to some unseen 'force' saying/thinking, "They'll be sorry they were so stupid"

[Zenlitened]

32. I'm not sure what you're getting at, honestly. I totally agree...

... that we see undeniable examples of cause and effect in nature. That's science at work: observing, interpreting, making connections.

The notion of karma is something else entirely, IMO, a matter of faith or mystical belief.

[Christa]

36. I agree. nt.

[G_j]

37. some views of Karma

don't conflict with science. There are those who do not believe in mystical miracles, but do have an unprovable belief that there is in an innate justice built into the universe (which doesn't favor humans). This may be thought of as 'religious'. Just thought I'd point this out because I know of plenty of individual belief systems that are devoid of dogma/rules. To put this in the context of the OP, there are others besides 'atheists' who view their own actions and the results in a similar, practical manner. The view of universal laws
as being "just" or "good" may be the one signifigant difference.

on edit: the use of the word "Karma" may not be the best choice.
For although it has become a popular term in our culture, it comes from a specific religion. 'cause and effect' works for me better

[Zenlitened]

39. Oh, I agree, atheists don't have a lock on ethicality.

I don't think that's what the author was saying, really.

But the karma thing, I'd say that "an unprovable belief" does conflict with science. Or maybe, a better way to put it, karma is not science but a belief.

[papau]

57. Exactly - to pretend that "observation and study " brings one to an

unprovable belief like atheism is silly.

But some folks will spend a day explaining how atheism is just good science. LOL :-)

What was meant I am sure as a simple "atheists don't have a lock on ethicality" statement that we might all agree to, is warped into a lie (IMHO), a lie that the religion of atheism teaches must be believed.

It is like the atheist above stated about a bookstore - does removing the last book from a bookstore end it's existence as a bookstore? Or do we await the resupply of new books, and during such a wait must we no longer call the bookstore a "bookstore".

I do love Zen.

[G_j]

67. were you referring to

my post?

"..that (what) the religion of atheism teaches must be believed."

I hope I didn't give that impression, because I am not an atheist myself. As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to the unknown/unprovable, it is not up to me tell anyone what they they should, or should not believe. We all get tired of being 'should upon'.

:-)

[Zenlitened]

74. Well, a more careful reading of the author's essay would show...

... he makes no pretense that he has "proven" there is no god.

That is, observation and study have led me to what seems to me the inescapable conclusion that god and religion are artifacts, created by people, and, in fact, altered and recreated regularly as convenience requires.

and

This is my honest conclusion, based, to begin with, on the realization that self-serving paradigms... are automatically suspect.

I think it's a matter of the author being intellectually honest with himself and his readers, rather than playing word-games and chopping logic in the hope of forcing others to submit to his point of view.

That would be... unethical.

Of course, some might look up "conviction" in the dictionary, and say aha! the definition includes the word "belief."

But it seems an awfully shallow and weak argument to maintain that having a collection of thoughts about a topic is somehow equivalent to worship, as some have attempted.

Tiresome.

Now if you'll all excuse me, I believe I'll go brew a pot of tea and turn in for the night.




edited to add omitted word "than"

[manic expression]

66. Karma and science

they support each other quite well. 2nd Law of Motion, anyone?

[BiggJawn]

18. Damn right!

OK, flame me if you want, but I maintain a fairly high standard of conduct NOT because I think some Sky Daddy is gonna squash me like a bug, but because it's the RIGHT thing to do!

What does it say about the ecclesiasticals when they express disbelief that Atheists are not immoral creatures because we do not acknowledge divine retribution?

How moral would the "Gawdly and Moral" be if they had their heavenly leash unhooked?

[azureblue]

20. The rules, & where do they come from.

The principle difference between all religions, philosophies, and atheism is this:
where did you get that set of ethics to live by, and how do you know there are true? And, in all religions, no one can make you follow "the rules" it is you choice.

[BiggJawn]

29. Go back and re-read the article.

In fact, go read it for the FIRST time.
Especially THIS bit:

" I answer thusly: If you believe in a god, then whatever evil you do, there is a power that can fix it. Whatever harm your actions cause, there is someone or something that can make it right. And that's fine.
But if you are an atheist, then you alone are completely responsible for the results of your actions. If you commit an act of vandalism and ruin some beautiful and fragile piece of nature, there is no one to mitigate the damage. If you harm someone, even inadvertantly, you can't take comfort in the fact that god will make it right for that person, in this life or the next. "

Use the test of applying a behavior or action to yourself. Would you be OK with somebody murdering you? No? then don't murder. How would you feel if somebody tricked you into signing a fraudulent contract that robbed you into poverty and homelessness? Pretty shitty, right? Then don't rip people off. would you want somebody to hit your car and say "fuck you, i don't have any insurance" No? then don't do that.

See how it works? No Sky Daddy holding a flaming rock over your head to make you "behave".

But then, would you like it if a bunch of foriegners came invading your town with guns and bombs? You wouldn't? and you wouldn't do that yourself? Oh, too bad, the Government doesn't LIKE that! They need you to believe that Gawd WANTS you to invade and kill other nations that don't "love GAWD"....

Enjoy your stay on DU.

[mondo joe]

27. Reminds me of why I fear cars with Jesus fish - they think they're going

to heaven so what do they care about safety?

[Lorien]

34. Beautifully put. I was once open to the possibility

of adopting Christianity or another religion, but that changed as I came to realize that many of the "Christians" I knew were using their faith as an excuse for truly awful behavior. Responsibility and accountability seemed to be reserved for those outside of the fundamentalist Christian fold, while the rest are "not perfect, just saved".

[Goldensilence]

77. what do you expect

when it's big thing is not learning from mistakes,trying to prevetn bad actions,moral behavior, and all that good jazz.

It merely focuses on FORGIVENESS. Nothing else.

[sleipnir]

35. Perfect. And beautiful.

Thanks for sharing.

And thank you Mr. Morris, if you're reading on here!

[KittyWampus]

40. Ethics is also nothing but human artifce & there're several false premise

premises the author starts with in just the few snips presented here.

"If you believe in a god, then whatever evil you do, there is a power that can fix it. Whatever harm your actions cause, there is someone or something that can make it right. And that's fine."

#1. I believe in "God" but my understanding ultimately transcends Duality (author falsely believes "good/evil" necessarily an aspect of religion.

#2. Author seems to buy into philosophy of Dualism (Good and Evil) tacitly for himself.

#3. Author falsely says Religion necessarily posits a distanct, omnipotent actor or force who goes around "fixing" things that we break. He's just making shit up here. What religion primarily talks about something going around fixing stuff others have broken. He seems obsessed with Victimhood.

#4. His 3rd erroneous assumption fails to take into account that Religion often deals with transforming our RE-actions to both real and percieved injustices. The focus on Christianity isn't 'fixing broken stuff' it's about turning the other cheek if one is harmed by another. Taking responsibility for one's actions and RE-actions.
....................................................................

My spiritual tradition doesn't ultimately rest in Duality and doesn't see things in black/white or terms of Good and Evil.

We take responsibility for ourselves but also take responsibility for transforming our reactions and responses. If someone harms us, we seek to understand why we put ourselves in the position for such a harmful action to occur. Further, we must decide to harness our emotional response to a percieved harmful event and go beyond the mindset of VICTIM. There might be legal reasons to pursue justice, but at the end of the day, we must practically deal with the hand we are dealt.

To the extent that anything is ever "Fixed", or transmuted, or evolved, it is done by the Creative Life Force that pulses through the body of Nature. Whether the author wants to recognize the Life Force that animates ALL of the Universe is his own business. But he and all athiests avoid the fact that we all share in being bits of the same One Thing that manages to be in constant flux, yet remain constant.

[Zenlitened]

41. Perhaps he should have said "judeo-christian god" for better clarity.

Or it may be that the idea of an uninvolved, dispersed consciousness fits better in a category other than "god," and so doesn't fall under the scope of what he's discussing.

[KittyWampus]

42. You got what I trying to say, sort of. LOL! Here's A Puzzle-

I went back and heavily editted what I wrote in a few spots. Important note though, I AM part of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Esoteric to be sure. :D

Puzzle: Science uses the word "Universe" which means One Word. Words are symbols or representations used to communicate Ideas, Principles and Desires.

How is it there is ONE Word? WHO or WHAT is speaking?

What Ideas, Principles or Desires are being expressed?

To WHOM is the One Word being expressed?

[Zenlitened]

44. That's leftover language. Words, and their meanings, evolve...

... or in some cases devolve from the specific to the generic. Kind of like the way we still say the sun rises and sets, though (nearly) everyone agrees its more a matter of the planet rotating.

[KittyWampus]

49. Possible Game- Invent A Newer, Reductionist Version Of "Universe"

I personally think there's much that can be discovered by probing the word 'Universe'. Especially since esoteric Religion considers "Word" to mean VIBRATION. And Science clearly sees Reality proceeding at some point from Vibration (Big Bang, Energy Waves).

But it'd be great to hear alternative, updated terminology.

Other terms besides Universe = Cosmos which stems from Order. Order implies Structure principally in contrast with Chaos. Hence, IMO, is a construct of a more Dualistic World View. Transcending that would require a word meaning "One THING".

How do you say Thing in Latin?

[Zenlitened]

51. Sounds like a topic for a separate thread. :)

:hi:

[kineneb]

59. answer comes from Hitchhikers Guide!

"Space is big, really big." Kind of transcends our simple notion of "universe" and puts us in our (very small) place.

[muriel_volestrangler]

69. Dictionary says from the Latin for 'turn'

Etymology: Latin universum, from neuter of universus entire, whole, from uni- + versus turned toward, from past participle of vertere to turn

[rockymountaindem]

43. I'll be completely honest, as a person of faith

I'd never thought of it that way before, and he makes an excellent point.

All this time I've defended atheism to my fundamentalist friends because I argued that belief in God was not a prerequsite to live within the laws of society which we have created to govern us all. I used to be an atheist (if you can really say that a child has a developped system of belief) when I was a kid, so I always try to defend atheists from the inane attacks fro fundies. I do believe in God now, so I can see both sides of the issue. I'm happier now, but I realize my way isn't the only way.

[AndreaCG]

47. Well I would hope it would be true of all people

Of course you have religious people who think atheists are immoral by definition.

[Zenlitened]

52. Well, I have to head out of town for a day or two. Keep on believ-- er, um

... keep on formulatin' points of view based on observational data and parsimonious logic.

Just doesn't have the same ring, huh?

Anyway, thanks for all the thoughtful responses on this thread. See you in a while.

:)

[papau]

58. LOL - well said!

:-)

[leftofthedial]

54. absolutely!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

thank you for the link. excellent piece.

[Hamlette]

60. This is EXACTLY how I was raised. Wish I'd written it. Great find!

I really must read the Salt Lake Tribune more often. Sheesh. Imagine. Right here in River City. And I thought I knew all the atheists here.

This guy is my new hero.

These are the lessons I was taught as a kid, the daughter and grandaughter of atheists. My dad used to say "the only person you need to answer to is yourself. That is punishment enough." How true.

[Nikia]

61. While I agree that atheists can be moral

I don't believe that they have no choice but to be moral. An atheist could simply not care about the person who he or she wrongs. This is especially true of people who feel that they have been wronged more than they deserve.
I work around a number of people who feel that they have been wronged more than they deserve. I think that for some of them, religious belief helps restrain them from feeling the need to fully repay the wrongs that they received. Jesus preached turn the other cheek and abandoning an eye for an eye thinking. Other religions preach that God will repay wrongs in one form or another. It provides some comfort to the oppressed.
Now whether or not God exists or not does not hinge on human belief. Whether or not God is, there are more factors in cause and effect that we can fathom. Good actions do not always lead to good in the greater scheme of things nor do bad actions bad. I agree that it is good to take personal repsonsibility for your actions regardless of your beliefs. If you believe though that everything has a clearly predictable chain of events associated with it, based upon one's actions, you will be disappointed and could easily revert to an "eye for an eye" philosophy.

[BiggJawn]

71. Youy can say the same thing about people of "faith".

Look at Jim Bakker. Could anyone think that he had some kind of delusion that he was doing those people he swindled a kindness?
but of course, someone is going to say "Bad example, Jawnn, Bakker isn't a REAL Christian."

Well, perhaps, but he started out as one, any road. Bakker and so many of those ilk are a good example of what happens when you actually start to believe your own bullshit.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. Yes, nihilism is a possible outcome of atheism, although certainly

not the most common one.

[madeline_con]

75. "There is no other choice."

What about the flip side; "There's no God, so who's gonna stop me?"

:shrug:

[really annoyed]

78. Answer

Question - "There's no God, so who's gonna stop me?"

Answer - Law, police enforcement, society. With or without God, you don't have the right to do whatever you want. You have to consider the people around you.

You are implying that people who do not believe in a higher power are more likely to be criminals - it is a false statement.

Look at the stats from the FBI (via 1997). This is a list of people who are incarcerated and their religious beliefs.

Response Number %
---------------------------- --------
Catholic 29267 39.164%
Protestant 26162 35.008%
Muslim 5435 7.273%
American Indian 2408 3.222%
Nation 1734 2.320%
Rasta 1485 1.987%
Jewish 1325 1.773%
Church of Christ 1303 1.744%
Pentecostal 1093 1.463%
Moorish 1066 1.426%
Buddhist 882 1.180%
Jehovah Witness 665 0.890%
Adventist 621 0.831%
Orthodox 375 0.502%
Mormon 298 0.399%
Scientology 190 0.254%
Atheist 156 0.209%
Hindu 119 0.159%
Santeria 117 0.157%
Sikh 14 0.019%
Bahai 9 0.012%
Krishna 7 0.009%


"Ethical atheist" is not an oxymoron.

[Zenlitened]

79. I think you make a good point, that there are HUMAN institutions...

.... human understandings of right and wrong, permissable and not, etc. that flourish quite nicely with no need to add "because god said so." The notions of community and society have no need for a god (nor god-police) at all, really.

[beam me up scottie]

76. You know, Zen...

First, let me say that I loved this piece, thank you for posting it.

But after reading the responses from believers and non, I'm starting to believe (yes, I'll use that word) that some religious people are either missing the part of their brain that allows them to think outside of the box, or if they did have it at one time, it was lost to atrophy.


How in the hell can anyone read a simple and articulate article like that and still come to the conclusion that atheism even remotely resembles a religious belief?

They are either incapable of comprehending the obvious because of their underdeveloped minds, or they are too terrified to look at their own beliefs the way others look at them.

I'd like to know what they are so frightened of.

That their faith will come up short?


It seems like believers who are secure in their faith are not threatened at all by atheists, and even go out of their way to see things from a different perspective.


Perhaps someone else has a different theory.

As for me, I'm tired of trying to reason with the unreasonable.

You cannot reach something that just isn't there.