A BELIEF IN GOD IN NOT NECESSARILY A PROMISE OF MORALITY
Bill Donohue you are wrong! But, first let me state where I agree with you. As you put it sociology 101 does demonstrate that throughout human history that morality has been grounded in religion. But, that hasn’t meant that religious people have all been good. Morality may have developed out of humanities religious tendencies but that doesn’t mean it needs to stay there, or that we even need religion to be good or moral people.
Mr. Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, does what so many religious minded people do when confronted with a non-believer. They immediately bring up notorious dictators such as Pol-Pot or Stalin. Yet, they seem silent on the issues of clerical sex abuse or the Vatican’s support of Fascist regimes in the 20th century. Spain’s Franco was openly supported and Hitler was given initial nods in the beginning as well. After the war the Vatican accepted money to help former Nazi war criminals escape justice. Why are they silent on these and many other issues?
There have been more crimes against humanity waged by religion then by atheists - mostly because religion has held the dominant position up into modern times - and this would indicate that religion or a belief in God has nothing necessarily to do with an individual or a society’s ability to be just or moral. Ultimately, it has to do with the individuals in that society. The individual informs how the institutions of society - secular and republic - will behave.
I watched Mr. Donohue get angry on Fox News as he claimed that Secular Humanists are sticking there nose where it doesn’t belong. But, can’t the same be said for religion? I noticed that the representative from the American Humanist Association was calm and rational while you got all angry and pissy! Whenever Humanists and Religionists occupy the same stage it is often the Religionist that gets angry. Why is that -maybe because religious faith is not predicated on the rational and that those who get angry cannot debate their position with any type of logical credibility?
Why is it okay for Christians to post signs with religious messages on public property, but if an atheist group wishes to post a message in a similar venue it is controversial? I for one am not offended by either groups desire to express their messages in public. It is all protected free speech.
Yes, Mr. Donohue there exist angry militant atheist activists. But, there also angry militant religious activists to and they are not all living in the Middle East. You claim that militant homosexuals invaded a local church somewhere, which if true, is wrong. But you have not condemned that unkind and bigoted passing of California’s Amendment 8. Since you are a Catholic I can only assume you support it.
Whether you like it or not, the United States was established as a secular republic. Atheists and Humanists have the same rights you do to express their views and opinions on television, over the airwaves, in public forums and yes, even on the side of busses.
Don’t forget that despite the First Amendment and despite the secular nature of our government in the early years of our history many felt that the United States was a Protestant Republic and that Catholics had no part in it or, for that matter, even belonged here. There was a lot of discrimination against Catholics.
Conservative Christian voices have long claimed that ours is a Christian Country. But, that is not entirely accurate. It is more accurate to state that we are a secular republic founded by largely by Protestant Christians of varying beliefs. It wasn’t all bible thumping Calvinists with their gloomy notion of predestination. In fact if it were up to the fatalistic Calvinists there may never have been an American Republic. It took the powerful thinking of Deists and Freemasons and other free thinking individuals as well.
Humanists are still in the minority. We are not taking over. In fact we struggle to have our voices heard and understood clearly. Religious bigotry and misrepresentation of our ideals with no clearer indication that Humanists are immoral because they don’t believe in God as the chief rallying cry against us.
Humanists are not immoral and neither are atheists - necessarily. An individuals morality or immorality is a personal choice and Humanists simply state that a belief in God is not necessary. Pious people are as likely to be immoral as an irreligious person is likely to be ethical.
If your morality is based on the fear of God or a desire to avoid an eternal damnation or hell or even just to avoid extended stay in purgatory is that even morality at all? It seems all rather self-serving even if good things do result. But, being moral and just for their sake alone - to honor and bring out the best in humanity without thought of personal gain or reward, now that seems like a true morality to me.