Religious value systems can diverge from commonly held contemporary moral positions , such as those on murder, mass atrocities, and slavery. For example, Simon Blackburn states that "apologists for Hinduism defend or explain away its involvement with the caste system, and apologists for Islam defend or explain away its harsh penal code or its attitude to women and infidels". In regard to Christianity, he states that the "Bible can be read as giving us a carte blanche for harsh attitudes to children, the mentally handicapped, animals, the environment, the divorced, unbelievers, people with various sexual habits, and elderly women", and notes morally suspect themes in the Bible's New Testament as well.  Christian apologists address Blackburn's viewpoints and construe that Jewish laws in the Hebrew Bible showed the evolution of moral standards towards protecting the vulnerable, imposing a death penalty on those pursuing slavery and treating slaves as persons and not property. Elizabeth Anderson holds that "the Bible contains both good and evil teachings", and it is "morally inconsistent".Elizabeth Anderson, "If God is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?" In Humanists like Paul Kurtz believe that we can identify moral values across cultures, even if we do not appeal to a supernatural or universalist understanding of principles – values including integrity, trustworthiness, benevolence, and fairness. These values can be resources for finding common ground between believers and nonbelievers.See Weber, Eric Thomas. "Religion, Public Reason, and Humanism: Paul Kurtz on Fallibilism and Ethics ." Contemporary Pragmatism 5, Issue 2 (2008): 131–47.
Religious value systems can also be used to justify acts that are contrary to contemporary morality , such as massacres, misogyny and slavery. For example, Simon Blackburn states that "apologists for Hinduism defend or explain away its involvement with the caste system, and apologists for Islam defend or explain away its harsh penal code or its attitude to women and infidels". In regard to Christianity, he states that the "Bible can be read as giving us a carte blanche for harsh attitudes to children, the mentally handicapped, animals, the environment, the divorced, unbelievers, people with various sexual habits, and elderly women", and notes morally suspect themes in the Bible's New Testament as well. Elizabeth Anderson likewise holds that "the Bible contains both good and evil teachings", and it is "morally inconsistent".Elizabeth Anderson, "If God is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?" In Christian apologists address Blackburn's viewpoints and construe that Jewish laws in the Hebrew Bible showed the evolution of moral standards towards protecting the vulnerable, imposing a death penalty on those pursuing slavery and treating slaves as persons and not property. Humanists like Paul Kurtz believe that we can identify moral values across cultures, even if we do not appeal to a supernatural or universalist understanding of principles – values including integrity, trustworthiness, benevolence, and fairness. These values can be resources for finding common ground between believers and nonbelievers.See Weber, Eric Thomas. "Religion, Public Reason, and Humanism: Paul Kurtz on Fallibilism and Ethics ." Contemporary Pragmatism 5, Issue 2 (2008): 131–47.
R
diverge from commonly held contemporary moral positions
also be used to justify acts that are contrary to contemporary morality
R
those on murder, mass atrocities,
massacres, misogyny
A
Elizabeth Anderson likewise holds that "the Bible contains both good and evil teachings", and it is "morally inconsistent".Elizabeth Anderson, "If God is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?" In
D
Elizabeth Anderson holds that "the Bible contains both good and evil teachings", and it is "morally inconsistent".Elizabeth Anderson, "If God is Dead, Is Everything Permitted?" In