Essay on Morality and Religion Debate

Not all people who are religious have sound morals, just as not all people who are atheistic are immoral. In his article, John Arthur discusses why religion does not depend on morality and morality does not depend on religion. Arthur seeks to alter the perspective of those who believe religion is necessary within a society to have a proper moral code. Many believe religion provides a purpose in life, a motivation to do what is right, and a set list of guidelines to follow in order to be a good person.

The belief that morality requires God remains a widely held moral maxim. In particular, it serves as the basic assumption of the Christian fundamentalist's social theory. Fundamentalists claim that all of society's troubles - everything from AIDS to out-of-wedlock pregnancies - are the result of a breakdown in morality and that this breakdown is due to a decline in the belief of God. This paper will look at different examples of how a god could be a bad thing and show that humans can create rules and morals all on their own. It will also touch upon the fact that doing good for the wrong reasons can also be a bad thing for the person.

In his article is repeats the concept of “discussing religion just as we discuss other beliefs”. At this time, Lindsay uses one of his colleagues at the Center for Inquiry to advocate the opposing argument. Dr. Austin Dacey’s book, The Secular Conscience, in his book “Dacey does not think it is a good thing for religious tenets to influence public policy, but he does maintain that religious beliefs can permissible advance as a justification for policies during public debates” (Lindsay). By implementing this source in his article Lindsay is pointing out that there is another justifiable side of the argument. This strategy is compelling to Lindsay’s argument, because he is able to poke holes in the base of the opposing side of the argument and why it could never worked. At one point in the article Lindsay inserts an excerpt from Dacey’s book for the purpose of employing a counter argument. Lindsay states that “the problem with Dacey’s proposal is that religious belief is not something usually held to the same standards of consistency, rationality, and evidential support as are other beliefs on which public policy might be based, and that includes moral beliefs” (Lindsay), and therefor shouldn’t be implemented in the government. Lindsay’s implementation of the counter argument establishes his credibility on the topic of discussion. For an article to be considered good writing in politics it has to be able to tell both sides of an argument, while giving valuable evidence on why their personal opinion is

Freedom of Religion is the freedom to pursue any religion you choose without fear of government persecution, sanction or reprisal. Freedom of Religion is protected under the first amendment, which gives American citizens the right to freedom of “speech, religion, press and to assemble and petition”. When the founders wrote it in the Bill of Rights, they put it first for a reason. The original pilgrims fled England after facing religious persecution from the Church of England. Over the years, America still struggles to define what that means. Though we are still arguing, the definitions are surprisingly easy for something that has been argued over so much.

Religion is constructed on faith and belief of an individual even though it is the individual choice to follow it or not. It has stirred a lot of debates for years; those who are trying to prove that God exists throughout history and follow to modern day. While, those who are atheist are trying to prove their point of God does not exist. There are still more and more theories and debate over the subject of religious view. It is a matter of theism versus atheism; new and old philosophers have joined the debate and all with different sides to another philosopher’s theory or view on the matter. In this paper, I will attempt to illustrate the reasons given by Louis Pojman of why religion is good or bad, as well as evaluating Bertrand Russell argument about religion. This can define the meaning of life and the creation of life as we know it. It can change views or switch sides for there is always another explanation to exactly what religion is all about and having a superior ruler that created all.

Ideology has started off when the first colonists came to America. This ideology has continued on for years in the way American has dealt with issues such as war. But moreover, it has integrated with religion to be a direct effect on wars we have been in. Morale has also been one of the central points of why America has responded to so many religious conflicts in America the way they have. And lastly, religion has been instrumental in imparting democracy through out America’s history of wars.

Religion was discovered back in 2000 BC and is considered to be a trait common to cultures worldwide to this day. Some use religion as a way to cope, to connect, but few could use religion as a weapon against others. Since religion began, over 195,035,000 lives have been lost in tragedies brought on in the name of faith. Regardless of the brutality religion has created, it has also caused others to come together in order to speak out. As a result of religions regression in society, humans are able to progress for the sake of defending human rights.

To many individuals, morality and religion are two related but distinct ideas. To be specific, morality consists of principles set by societal norms concerning the distinction between right and wrong and good and bad behaviour among persons. Alternatively, religion involves the relationship between human beings and a transcendent reality or a superhuman controlling power, God. In many societies in the past and present, the idea of God is used to help reinforce moral codes as valuable and vital through rituals and methods of presenting the teachings of God. By many, religion is used to instil fear

Religion in Schools has proven to be a very controversial matter as of lately. Even though teaching about religion is allowed in public schools, there are still many questions that are being asked in order to provide a basis of what is appropriate for school, and what is inappropriate. The first amendment to the United States Constitution says that 'congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof' which implies that you have the choice of exercising your own religion, no matter what it may be. However, this poses an interesting argument within the public schools of America because we have such a diverse population with

Morals are norms of behaviour that the society acknowledges. Religion sets rules and customs for its followers. These religious rules influence the legislative system. If religion plays a role in government policies, it would also influence laws. For example, religious beliefs and morals influence abortion laws in many parts of the world. It is still looked upon as morally wrong on the basis of religious ideas to undergo an abortion procedure. Phillip Montague points that “legal and political debate and decision making should be governed by standard criteria for assessing reasons and reasoning, and when religious considerations fail to satisfy such criteria, they should not be allowed to influence matters of law and public policy” (Montague 17). He further states that these matters consist of abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia along with numerous subjects of social justice such as welfare policies. Montague claims that in comparison with secular reasons, “religious reasons fail by a wide margin to deal adequately with the complexity of such issues” (Montague 17). For instance, a person who argues that homosexuality is morally wrong for the reason that it opposes the divine law would be referring to religious grounds to support his argument and not secular. Individuals should not be arguing for restrictive laws or policies if they do not have secular grounds to support them. They should only put across views that are

To answer this question, we must first understand what both ethics and morality are. As ethics is defined as the philosophical study of morality, those who study religion get their moral precepts from what they believe God says should be done. This perspective is not at all unexpected, because all religions apply a perspective on morality. Morality is defined as beliefs concerning right and wrong, good and bad- beliefs that can include judgements, values, rules, principles, and theories. Morals are what help us guide our actions, define our values, and give us reason for being the person that we are.

To be moral simply means to do what is right; however, doing what is right is easier said than done. Perhaps if one was a child, one would, to the best of their abilities, follow what his parents demand of him, this would constitute them as doing what is right. Now let us say that the child is an orphan, or does not believe what his parents say is right, should following them still be considered moral, or is it even up to him to decide? Perhaps the child has evolved past parenting all together and therefore needs no more guidance. Defining what is considered moral has now become much more complex. Sam Harris presents the same basic argument of morality in his book Letter to a Christian Nation, by applying it not to a child and his parents,

Some people believe our life is based off of morals, a belief of right/justification or wrong/ unjust. Living this way perceives their ways of the world by doing what they feel is good or bad or what is lead by their conscience regardless of religion. Others believe in religion, a feeling or act of faith, from God or “gods” ( Merriam-Webster). These acts motivated by faith and God/ “gods” provide a comprehension between choices, a choice given to all for all based off of a religious belief. In analyzing this presentation, it will show what the writer of this topic is trying to point out to the intended audience or its purpose, while conveying to the readers what morality and religion is.

I can imagine a perfect world. A world where morality is of upmost importance in our dealings with each other, where morals are critically examined, and debated with reason as well as passion. This world would be a pinnacle of human achievement. A pinnacle that we are nowhere near. Why is this? Well, in today's society, morals are often associated with obeying the law, and since laws are legislated by politicians, they are subject to politics. Laws are not right in and of themselves, and morals are not a matter of a majority's opinion. Some matters that are in the domain of charity are done through politics, often citing morality as a reason. Where exactly does charity fit in with morals? With politics? In this paper I will explore the

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of religion is as follows: “the belief in a god or in a group of gods, an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods, or an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group” (Merriam-Webster.) My personal definition of religion is that it is a set of beliefs and practices that generally pertain the worship of one or more than one spiritual beings or representations of a spiritual power. Religion can be personal belief or an organization or group of people who have similar beliefs and values. There are many different types of religions in the world and have been since the