Theists are no more moral than the irreligious

Many seem to view morality as some detached component that is given, decreed or acquired. It is not. The driving forces for the set of rules that govern our conduct are found in evolution, not the divine. Richard Dawkins notes that cooperation and rules have been observed in the societies of other animals, namely the macaques. Humans would not have lived long enough for the advent of any sort of organised or edifying religion if we had thought that murder and theft were permissible and came without consequences. "Jesus, the Word that is in all creation, the Truth itself, the son of God, he said stealing is wrong. He"s the boss for me politically, theologically, spiritually, ect. He has a rightful last say in this issue no matter what I want to think." Why does Jesus have a rightful say in the issue? Where does his morality derive from? Let us assume that he was the son of God, that he was a divine figure that appeared before stupefied, illiterate, superstitious goat-herders in a benighted 1st century Palestine. What moral concept did he introduce that hadn"t been in the reach of Man"s intellect or sense. Treat your neighbour as yourself? Confucius, who predated Jesus, had also remarked on the Golden Rule. The fact that he too could be used as a moral grounding (in the same way that you would use Jesus) shows that is it meaningless; that these figures do not give us morals; rather, it is an inherent function of humanity, and is part of our evolution. As a Christian, what do you make of a God who endorses slavery, genocide, the smiting of cities, mass floods for the putative claim of immorality (even for babies)? In this day and age, do you agree with these actions? Well of course you don"t: Our collective principles have evolved and improved. You take morals from someone because of their authority? In 1 Corinthians 14:34, Paul states that, "Women[a] should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says." Do you still believe in that? What about Jesus" sneering attitude towards a non-Hebrew woman (Jesus only "arrived" to save the "Chosen People"): Mark 7:26-28: "26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter. 27 "First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children"s bread and toss it to the dogs." 28 "Lord," she replied, "even the dogs under the table eat the children"s crumbs."" True, he did eventually help her, but only subsequent to her importuning"what happened to being the saviour of mankind? "You can write on a piece of paper "jaywalking is punishable by death" but unless you get the mayor or someone like that to put there rubber stamp the statement is not really true. So it is with morality. What do you have to build off of to claim one thing is "right" and another is "wrong"? just your reasoning?" Actually, yes. Reasoning is the chief tool that enables a more moral society. A hundred years ago, people, including (and especially) Christians, viewed African-Americans to be inferior to white Americans, not quite human, barbarous in nature. But with greater awareness, more information, more reasoning, it has been acknowledged that people should not be discriminated on because of the colour of their skin, a trait that is incontrollable; and that we are all equal, regardless of race. Forward to today, and it would be completely unacceptable to be disparaging towards another race. Morals have evolved. "But you, an atheist".well while I have a solid authority (to my perception anyway because I believe in him) backing up the matter, you have no authority out there to back up anything you say about morality." I, as an atheist, do have something to back up a moral tenet. Let"s examine each other"s. Who is more moral? "A theist who doesn"t steal because "Jesus" or the "Bible" said so. "An atheist who doesn"t steal because it would bring pain and discomfort to the affected party. "A theist who doesn"t murder because he wants eternal bliss in heaven. "An atheist who doesn"t murder because he finds it wrong to deprive a person of their life and the pleasure of their friends and families. I will now answer your questions: 1)Murder is wrong: It halts a life being fulfilled to its fullest extent, it brings grief and pain to the members of the victim"s friends and families and it causes a great deal of pain towards one"s self having performed the act. One will notice that murders happen due to: a)The murderer being psychologically damaged; b)The murderer fervently and genuinely believing that his/her action is right (like if the Bible says that a "witch shall not live"); c)From heat of the moment and its concomitant factors which pressures someone into a murder they later regret. 2)Lying is wrong if it brings pain towards a party or has injurious consequences. 3)Polygamy is not a primordial moral that should be considered significantly. All I can say is that polygamy without polyandry is unfair, and that humans are rarely noted to be faithful. By the way, the Bible places no restrictions on the number of wives a man may have (research the number of wives King Solomon had). 4)Monogamy: See above. 5)Stealing, again, is wrong, for it causes displeasure and woe to many parties. 6)Premarital sex is not necessarily amoral: name one victim that arises that unwillingly becomes one? 7)Abortion"honestly exasperated by the debate on this. I"ll just give you this: When a couple undergo IVF, they discard many fertilized eggs to allow one to be born. Should barren couples be denied children? 8)Gay sex: Look at number 6. 9)Incest: It goes without saying that it"s wrong; anyway, most of us are hard-wired to repulse such tendencies anyway. It comes from the evolutionary process, whereby we repudiated it due to its limiting affects on survival (because of the diseases and genetic disorders that arise from the offspring). By the way, how did Adam and Eve populate the Earth? 10)Gambling: Not an important moral concept to talk on, but I personally don"t approve of it. 11)Alcoholism: A sordid act, chiefly because of the harm it brings to society and crime rates. 12)Second hand smoking: Again, has secondary effects that are injurious, so not something I approve of. 13)Suicide: Something that must be tackled before it can transpire. 14)Cyber-bullying: Same as bullying: A disgusting act due to its effects on the victim. I now await your response, and I anticipate what you have to say. I leave you with one request: Name one original moral that Christianity has produced...