Atheist Morality

One of the charges atheists sometimes get is that without the theist framework, there is no morality... (but) if God is the determinant of right and wrong, then that moral framework seems hardly inseparable from subjectivity. For could not God decide tomorrow that murder is acceptable?

This is quote from an essay by Brett Milam, and it's why I have such a hard time with people that say, "If you don't believe in God, then you don't have a moral compass. Anything goes!"

Christianity, Islam, and other religions, as they are practised by millions right now, today, justify rape, the subjugation of women, the oppression of non-believers or different believers, the denial of full rights and services to certain groups, and slavery. I am an atheist, and I am opposed to all of those practices - yet Christians and Muslims will say that I'm the one that lacks a moral compass because I'm an atheist?

I believe that morality is rooted in humanity, in our humanness - not in religion. Religion is a reflection of that morality, filtered through a belief in a super powerful all-knowing magical invisible being who is in control of the universe. Morality actually comes from our human capacity for empathy and from reality. I have no desire to kill a person, but if someone did have that desire, they have a choice before them, if they think about the act: kill that person, cause suffering to the remaining family, and, perhaps, go into incarceration for the act if it is deemed by society to be unlawful, OR, don't kill. It's not only the legal consequences that keep people from killing another human; it's also the moral and ethical consequences. People who have a desire to kill and then do it believe they are justified in doing so, for whatever reason, often despite what the law or their religious leaders say.

All of the religions that adhere to the Old Testament - Jews, Christians and Muslims - have no religious prohibitions against incest. The Old Testament does not prohibit incest; Lot had sex with his daughters, and had children by them, and neither he nor they are ever condemned for such. Based on their religion's teachings, based on what they believe God has said and done, incest should not be immoral for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Yet, it is - at least for most believers. Why? Mechanisms to avoid incest are widespread both in nature and across human societies - as Psychology Today points out, "the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get." Humans must have seen rather early on that having sex close with relatives creates an astonishingly high chance that offspring will be born with a serious birth defect. In addition, certain sexless relationships have proven fundamental to our positive development in life, as humans; a trusting, supportive relationship with a mother, a father, a sibling, a step-father, a step-mother, a grandparent, etc. would be absolutely destroyed by sex. Even certain friendships and professional relationships can be destroyed by sexual relations, which is why most people aren't out trying to have sex with everyone in their lives, and many professional settings prohibit teachers, executives, coaches and others from having sex with subordinates. In short, societies' abhorrence to incest comes not from religion, but from our humanity and reality.

So morality for atheists is so much more than "whatever feels right." Our morality is often rooted in a sense of compassion that most humans are born with (the exception being sociopaths). So many of my atheists friends study philosophy, formally and informally - and through such, have developed strong critical thinking skills, and have a strong sense of social responsibility, and a strong concern for global and humanitarian issues - qualities that I just don't find among people who approach work and life from a particular religion. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein, philosopher, novelist and author of Plato at the Googleplex, recently told The Atlantic that studying philosophy helps make a student "a citizen in this world." She also says "It makes life so much more interesting. It’s us at our most human. And it helps us increase our humanity. No matter what you do, that’s an asset."

Morals are fluid, to a degree - what you believed as a child, or even in your 20s, may not be what you believe now. Maybe you thought divorce was unethical and should be prohibited by law when you were younger, following the teachings of Jesus, but now, years later, you yourself are divorced - still reading the Bible, still a Christian, but you have committed a sin in the eyes of Jesus. You altered your moral compass, however, based on reality, and probably based on what was best for you and your family. I sometimes change my mind about the ethics of something for similar reasons - or because of reading about different perspectives.

When I was trying to be a Christian, I was bothered by how all emphasis was on accepting Jesus as God in order to be saved in the afterlife, but there was little said about this life, the here and now, and the importance of compassion, of empathy and of love. I was told again and again how this life on Earth just didn't matter at all - I should be concerned with the afterlife. Sad about people going hungry? Don't worry - Jesus said the poor would always be with us, it's in his hands, just focus on Jesus as your savior so you can make it to Heaven some day.

When I stopped trying to be a Christian, I felt so much more free - to pursue friendships, to act on my sense of social responsibility, to fight against injustice, to explore different ideas, to offer help to others, even to love. I like the Biblical stories of the Good Samaritan (my favorite Bible story, in fact), and the Sermon on the Mount. I like the story of the "Companions in the Cave" in the Quran - also known as the Sleepers of Ephesus, who hid inside a cave to escape a persecution, and took in a dog with them - it seems to me the point is not only their faithfulness, but also that we should treat dogs kindly, as members of our family. I like that one of the Pillars of Islam is Zakāt, the believe that it is the personal responsibility of each Muslim to ease the economic hardship of others and to strive towards eliminating inequality. I love that the Jewish term mitzvah has also come to express an act of human kindness, not just a duty to a god. But I don't believe these ideas come from the magical invisible friend - the one that also says you can kill and rape others. These particular ideas I've named from these three religions make sense. Kindness makes sense. The benefits of kindness, in the long run, are worth the work of being kind. Kindess is universally good - without God.

Think of the Children!

Dear Abby published an interesting letter today, from a woman who, along with her husband, is an atheist. Their families are quite religious, and the writer said that "several nieces and nephews (ages 4 to 9)... have asked us repeatedly why we don't go to church with them, since the whole family attends together. Their mother has made it clear that they do not want the children knowing there is another option besides Christianity..."

Abby gave her some potential responses, and then added, "While I respect your in-laws' desire to practice their faith, I think it is unrealistic to try to keep children in the dark because as soon as they hit school -- unless they are home-schooled or in a church-run school -- they are going to meet other kids who worship differently or not at all."

I face this issue myself. I have nieces that I absolutely adore, who are being raised in a very religious household, one where they are told that if a person hasn't accepted Christ as his or her savior, that person is going to hell. Eventually, my nieces are going to be told that Aunt Autumn is going to hell, because I won't lie to them; I will tell them I'm not a Christian if they ever ask, and because of what they are being taught, it's going to hurt them. And that breaks my heart. But I didn't create this situation, and I won't be the last person around them that turns out not to be a Christian.  

I hope that, when they ask me if I'm a Christian, or they ask me why I'm not one, I get to also tell them I believe in love, in kindness and in humanity, that I think all people are part of a great big family on Earth, and that life is wonderful when we work to learn about each other and our world, when we help each other, when we celebrate each other, and through working to keep our planet healthy. I'll never try to convince them to not be a Christian, but I will also never stop trying to help them love science and the diversity of humanity.

Secular research reveals - we're good people!

Secularists tend to be more ethical than religious people. On average, they are more commonly opposed to the death penalty, war and discrimination. And they also have fewer objections to foreigners, homosexuals, oral sex and hashish.

The most surprising insight revealed by the new wave of secular research so far is that atheists know more about the God they don't believe in than the believers themselves. This is the conclusion suggested by a 2010 Pew Research Center survey of US citizens. Even when the higher education levels of the unreligious were factored out, they proved to be better informed in matters of faith, followed by Jewish and Mormon believers.

From Does Secularism Make People More Ethical? in Der Spiegel

You don't need religion to be sexist

Atheists love to criticize religious folk for their sexist practices - for demanding women be silent, to not teach, etc. (I Timothy 2:11-14). We are particularly amused by fundamentalist Christians criticizing what the Qu'ran may or may not say about the treatment of women, when the Bible has verses like:

And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire. (Leviticus 21:9)

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. (I Corinthians 11:14)

Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works. (Revelation 2:22-23)

But people that believe in a magical invisible friend don't have a monopoly on sexism; sadly, lots of Atheists can be not-so-rational when it comes to their ideas about women.

Linda Henneberg, a science communication intern at CERN in Switzerland wrote a blog post about her experiences at the laboratory as both a woman and a non-PhD physicist:

I was very excited to be at CERN for the summer. I am still excited. I love it here and I wish I could work here forever. But I did not expect to be uncomfortable or creeped out on a weekly basis. I did not expect to be hit on by a large proportion of the men I saw in a social setting. I did not expect that CERN would start me on the road to being a cynical feminist, a type of person I previously dismissed, but which I now understand.

Ouch. Henneberg's blog further inspired a blog on the Scientific American web site by Jennifer Oullette on how hard women have it in the science/skeptic universes:

I am very comfortable in male-dominated environments, and accustomed to being the only woman in the room. And yet I have had far more negative experiences with men in the skeptic/atheist community than anywhere else.

Ouch again!

I have to admit that the only gathering of skeptics I've been a part of was a tour of a whiskey distillery in Portland, Oregon with Pastafarians, so I can't speak to this at all from experience. The closet I've come to a community of Atheists is in the comments section of the Friendly Atheist, a blog by Richard Wade which brought these other blogs to my attention. If it weren't for Richard, I'd never know this sexism-among-atheists was an issue, but now I do, beginning with his reporting on the nasty backlash faced by one woman who talked online about being frightened by a guy at an Atheist/skeptics meeting hitting on her in an elevator at 4 AM.

Richard Dawkins didn't help AT ALL with his completely out-of-touch, sexist comments of his own:

The man in the elevator didn't physically touch her, didn't attempt to bar her way out of the elevator, didn't even use foul language at her. He spoke some words to her. Just words. She no doubt replied with words. That was that. Words. Only words, and apparently quite polite words at that....Rebecca's feeling that the man's proposition was 'creepy' was her own interpretation of his behavior, presumably not his. She was probably offended to about the same extent as I am offended if a man gets into an elevator with me chewing gum.

Wow, Dawkins. For a scientist, you sure can be a Dumb Ass!

Sexism always rears up where I least expect it. And then often doesn't show up at all where I'm on my guard. I work in aid and international development, and I'm sorry to say I have to watch everything I say and do, and take care what invitations I accept, in oh-so-many situations. Not so much when I'm around locals - no, it's with other aid workers! By contrast, I attend motorcycle rallies for people who travel internationally by motorcycle, and so far, it's been incredibly empowering - I've had men walk up to me specifically to tell me how much they admire me for riding my own bike and could they give my email address to their wives they are trying to convince to ride?

Many in the skeptics community aren't reacting well to being called out for sexist practices and attitudes. But, then, most individuals and many communities react poorly to such an accusations - no one likes to be called prejudiced. I hope all these women scientists and Atheist female bloggers will keep coming forward and sharing their stories - the more specific, the better. I think it's only through continuous sharing that, eventually, our community will accept that we might need to work on ourselves regarding this issue.

Except for Dawkins. I don't have much hope for someone who equates being propositioned in an elevator at 4 a.m. with the annoyance of standing next to a gum chewer. Geesh.

Why do Atheists get married?

Christians love to say that the purpose of marriage is to get your union recognized by God and to have children. Therefore, marriage is only for Christians -- or at least only for "believers" (Muslims, Jews, Hindus, etc.). It also means that marriage is only for people who can bear children or, at least, will adopt children.

It's a fascinating, narrow view of marriage since, according to the earliest references in the Bible, the joining of a husband and wife wasn't at all religious -- it was about ownership, about property, and often made official through sexual intercourse, including rape. It was about owning a woman and ensuring all her kids were her owner's -- her husband's -- through exclusive sexual relations. In fact, the earliest references to loving partnerships in the Bible aren't between a man and a woman; they are between people of the same sexes, first Ruth to Naomi (in the Book of Ruth, 1:16-18) and then Jonathan and David (in the First Book of Samuel, 20:41-42). Marriage doesn't evolve into a sacrament until much later in the Bible (yup, I've read it -- more on that in a later blog).

Yet, I'm married. We had a fantastic secular ceremony where there was nary a mention of a magical invisible friend, but where I did wear a fabulous dress (a green sari, actually), followed by a kickin' catered celebration with our friends and family -- and a LOT of wine, just like Jesus would have wanted!

As an Atheist, why did I want to get married? It certainly wasn't for religious reasons. It also wasn't to have children. And I certainly am not owned by my husband (which he would be only too happy to enthusiastically affirm).

I got married because I want this guy that is now my husband

• to be able to see me in the hospital no matter what, and vice versa.
• so that one of us can put the other on the company health insurance as soon as one of us works for a company that offers insurance.
• so that he has access to all my assets and vice versa.
• so that we can live in each other's countries oh-so-easily (he's German).
• to be able to legally call each other family and have all the legal rights and privileges that come with that designation.
  

My husband and I didn't need marriage to love each other nor to live with each other, at least not in most countries. But we did need marriage so that in every circumstance life might throw at us, whatever government or company bureaucracy we deal with will see us as a family. And you only get that through being married. Or adoption. We went with marriage.

If any religion doesn't want to recognize our marriage because it in no way involves God or children, that's fine with me. I don't care whether or not they do. But if they try to deny us any of the benefits for which we got married, there will be Hell on Earth to pay -- and I will be the one to bring it.

It's one of the reasons I'm such an adamant supporter of marriage rights for gay people. I would be enraged if I didn't have access to my husband in the hospital, if an insurance company said, "We don't recognize your partnership as a family" -- or if a religious institution got the official word as to whether or not I have the legal right to marry. Yet that's exactly what happens to gay people. And if a government can decide that gay people can't marry because that's what the Christians say, it's only a matter of time before they decide atheists can't marry either. Scary.

On a side note: we really love our marriage vows, which we wrote ourselves. If you are looking for some inspiration for a secular wedding ceremony, drop me a line!