morals of an non believer ...

[jimniki]

I'm a good person ...as good as the next bloke..
I don't steal, cheat, murder, bla, bla.

I don't live my life based on any writings...
The fear of burning in hell means nothing to me...
I do it because I feel it is the right thing to do? (both legally and morally)

Maybe, you can argue that I grew up with Christian values without realising it.

My question is who is more likely to commit offences? (per capita)
religious people or non religious people...

I'm getting feelings from this forum in general that the majority of christian people (for the sake of this example) feel that without a faith to guide us, we non believers are more prone to commit wrongful acts...

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Consider these findings:

• Black and white violence decreased significantly as the percentage rose of county residents who belonged to congregations or were regular attenders.
• Black and Latino violence was lower in communities where residents belonged to similar types of religious institutions, indicating faith groups from similar traditions were able to exert greater influence on community values when they had a significant presence.
• Religious homogeneity was not associated with overall rates of white violence, but further breakdowns showed communities with larger percentages of evangelicals had lower rates of white violence. Latino violence was significantly reduced in communities with large numbers of active Catholics.
• Black violence dipped dramatically in counties with high levels of poverty, unemployment and low levels of education where large percentages of residents were active in congregations. This is a key finding, as communities with severe social and economic disadvantages are more likely to have high violent crime rates.

No Time For Crime: Study Finds More Religious Communities Have Lower Rates Of Black, White and Latino Violence | David Briggs

But then you consider...

Global Peace Index Shows Least Religious Countries Among Most Peaceful, Highly Religious Countries Among The Least Peaceful

 

[LuisDantas]

Personally, I don't think Christianity as a whole is particularly succesfull at promoting morality. Quite on the contrary even. Of the most widespread religions it may well be the most removed from morals, just above those that are actively harmful and arguably included in that group.

Of course, this if the Non-Theistic DIR, so it will be difficult to find answers here that disagree with you. Maybe you will want to try a similar thread in General Religious Debates or plain Religious Debates sometime.

 

[The Adept]

...

My question is who is more likely to commit offences? (per capita)
religious people or non religious people...

I'm getting feelings from this forum in general that the majority of christian people (for the sake of this example) feel that without a faith to guide us, we non believers are more prone to commit wrongful acts...

We have the Law of the Land to guide us (within reason).
Is this irrelevant?

To don't list:
Shoot an Abortion Doctor
Volunteer for Jihad

 

[Sees]

Morality is a human thing and not bound to any traditions.

What a religious tradition can do is make certain immoral things out to be OK.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If one needs a religious book to tell them it's not okay to murder people and sleep with their neighbor's wife, then I'm glad we have such lists for those people.

 

[Sha'irullah]

The morals of a believer would seem to be hypothetically lower considering that their morality is based off a form of legality and not morality. In Islam for example everything is done in accordance to a particular fiqh.
It has nothing to do with the person wanting or desiring to do something for another person it is a matter of obedience to god. So whether they want to help others is not out of love of the person but out of fear of god.

Christians are at a worst position int he fact that the Bible contains vast amounts of contradictions when compared to the Qur'an which is significantly more solid at least. Yahweh tells his people

Exodus 20:13 "You shall not murder"

Yet ironically after this God demands vast acts of genocide. On top of this he did this before Exodus with the flood. Could he not guide mankind into morality instead of destroying them?
This means that it is not even morality. One must lie when reading the Bible and commit acts of self deceit and cherry pick the good from it.

People who are religious can indeed be moral but if they profess their morality comes from these books they are morally bankrupt.

 

[KnightOwl]

I did an an informal gathering of info about this a few years ago. Using natiomaster and adherents(.com?) I found a loose but marked correlation between murder rates and religiosity. Russia bucked the trend most if I recall correctly.

I chose murder because it is so obvious. Now if we chose something like failure to pray, and called that immoral, the results would have been different. He he.

 

[Renji]

One can know what's right or wrong even outside religious creeds, beliefs and dogmas. Besides, you can see a lot of 'religious people' doing what according to them is morally incorrect.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I saw some arguments about non-believers having no morals and questioning where they get their morals from.

Well, I see that rude. Non believers are humans too and they can tell the right from the wrong. As long as we don't intend harm to others, it does not matter what believing orientation we have. I actually had experiences with non believers with higher morals than believers.

 

[Clarky]

The whole idea of morality only being a gift from God really is the greatest of insults to mankind.

 

[Deidre]

It's interesting, but I've read that the majority of people incarcerated in American prisons are religious people, atheists make up a very small portion of the prison population.

Religion isn't a magic elixir that causes people effortless morality. I'm rather anti-marriage, but the divorce rate is highest amongst evangelical Christians, another report I read recently. Atheists have the least amount of divorce. So, religion obviously isn't necessary for leading a productive, upstanding life. But religious folks would have atheists believe that.

 

[Revoltingest]

I saw some arguments about non-believers having no morals and questioning where they get their morals from.
Well, I see that rude. Non believers are humans too and they can tell the right from the wrong. As long as we don't intend harm to others, it does not matter what believing orientation we have. I actually had experiences with non believers with higher morals than believers.

If people want to argue that we heathens lack morals, I don't see it as rude, or take it personally. I even encourage them to discuss it.....how else will they learn? If they see that we share almost all values, then they often question the idea that this can come solely from religion.

 

[Valjean]

Crime rates are higher in the bible belt states. Apparently religiosity is only skin deep.

 

[Revoltingest]

Crime rates are higher in the bible belt states. Apparently religiosity is only skin deep.

Really?
Try visiting Detroit, Flint or Saginaw....if you dare!
U.S. Crime Index State Rank

 

[Banjankri]

My question is who is more likely to commit offences? (per capita)
religious people or non religious people...

The more authority you have above you, the less aware you have to be about the consequences of your action.
Authority can overwrite empathy, thus religious people which where shaped by, and are part of a religious structure, are more likely to inflict harm.

 

[Smart_Guy]

If people want to argue that we heathens lack morals, I don't see it as rude, or take it personally. I even encourage them to discuss it.....how else will they learn? If they see that we share almost all values, then they often question the idea that this can come solely from religion.

Bigots will never learn no matter how they discuss things. They will only learn when they change themselves and get their heads out of their @$$es. I'm not saying to take personally, but it is rude to question the morals of other groups just because they follow different approaches. Even if they think some group doesn't have morals, they should keep it to themselves instead of demonizing them over it.

And dude, my post is like 2 months old.... wait, old!!! This figures

 

[Revoltingest]

Bigots will never learn no matter how they discuss things.

Defeatist!

They will only learn when they change themselves and get their heads out of their @$$es. I'm not saying to take personally, but it is rude to question the morals of other groups just because they follow different approaches. Even if they think some group doesn't have morals, they should keep it to themselves instead of demonizing them over it.

I'd rather they say what's on their minds. Then we can discuss it.

And dude, my post is like 2 months old.... wait, old!!! This figures

The thread was reanimated.
Your old posts come back to haunt you!

Digression:
About bigots.....I see many calls here at RF to rail against them, to not talk with them, to shame them. But among those I see making this call (not you, SG), are people who are also bigoted in some way. They'd be horrified if I treated them as they would treat other bigots. We have feminists with bad attitudes towards men, atheists with bad attitudes towards believers, lefties with bad attitudes towards conservatives (even advocating employment discrimination), etc, etc. Imperfect people should be wary of sanctimonious bullying.

 

[Smart_Guy]

About bigots.....I see many calls here at RF to rail against them, to not talk with them, to shame them. But among those I see making this call (not you, SG), are people who are also bigoted in some way. They'd be horrified if I treated them as they would treat other bigots. We have feminists with bad attitudes towards men, atheists with bad attitudes towards believers, lefties with bad attitudes towards conservatives (even advocating employment discrimination), etc, etc. Imperfect people should be wary of sanctimonious bullying.

No one is perfect, Revolt. We all do mistakes, we all have what others hate in us, and there are things we insist on regardless to what others think of. I understand that, but what matters in the end is the action, either verbal or physical, and its results. I think it is okay to be radical, extremest, bigoted, but to keep it to ourselves and not allow it to hurt others. On another hand, some of those doing actual harm, were victims pushed to do it and we need to talk to them so I guess you are right in letting them talk then discuss it... but then again, some of them are just ay holes with bad intents. basing their thoughts on what they hear, thinking their conclusions/decisions/judgements on others are perfect..

This is getting complicated and disoriented... never mind