This is such utter garbage. Sorry but historically the religious justification for moral actions was 'listen to US because we have the authority of God backing us' an appeal to authority. It wasn't encouraging anyone to think deeply about the topic.flash2015 wrote: ↑Sat Oct 28, 2023 3:30 pmI think an important part of mainstream religion was that it set down a morality framework which can be used to guide decisions on right and wrong. While we may disagree with some of the decisions, it was well understood how these decisions were made. At least that was my experience with it.
Now morality decisions are being made at a much shallower level. Morality is being defined by a soundbite or a slogan. The promise of atheism was that we would have better reason based decisions but in some ways we appear to be making decisions with even less reason.
And because these ideas are understood in such a shallow way there is a rising intolerance of those that have different beliefs/values. How can you find common ground when your philosophy can be defined on a bumper sticker?
God as an answer to any question (like why the the rain fall) tends to be an end to enquiry.
Atheists are forced - by the very nature of their lack of an authority figure to turn to - to think more deeply about everything, morality in particular. It can be questioned by anyone and this ends up far more nuanced and while not necessarily more compassionate, a lack of compassion in the answers can be rejected by anyone.
Atheististic morality may seem to you to be less substantial because it lacks the solid certainly of your dogma. But it is precisely this certainty, this blind faith and devotion which has facilitated the worst crimes committed in the name of God (from Crusades to slavery to colonialism, all unjust acts justified in the name of God).
I find you reasoning both flawed and ignorant of the depth of philosophical thought which atheists have plumbed.