Morality, Religion, and God

Regardless of whether or not God exists, murder is an unethical act. It becomes an even worse type of transgression if we believe in God’s presence, because religious teachings forbid such bad behavior. People are taught how to be moral through faith, and it serves as a foundation for ensuring that they do not hurt their fellow humans. People are obligated to obey the mandates of worshipping and procreating while they are in the presence of God. As a result, killing goes against God’s procreation objectives, and it’s something he didn’t want to do to his people after they were formed. It is worth noting that the connection between God and morality can result in both negative and positive forms of correlation when put into practice. One can be moral even without believing in the existence of God. Besides, there are so many immoral people who are aware of the religious teachings and acknowledge the existence of God. A conclusion on the issue can thus be made that God’s existence is not intertwined with any moral precepts.
Those who do not believe in the existence of God can turn out to be highly moral people, resulting in questions about the God triggering morality. From the concept of Tabula rasa, people are first introduced to a set of beliefs, values and the most acceptable skills by their parents at a tender age. The socialization shapes people are considerate and carefully determining how they live their lives without causing harm to others. People can thus act in accordance with the high moral standards without the belief of the existence of a deity. There are many life accounts of non-believers who raised children that were moral, perfect and completely harmless people without a bad track record. Comparatively, there are good examples from any given community where children that were brought up by two religious parents ending up in prison for worst forms of crimes such as domestic violence, rape, and fraud. In some communities, members use the lost children of these highly religious people to discredit the importance of religion for failing to effectively guide the closest people who are the immediate family. People, therefore, get torn between sticking to their morals and principles that are not guided by God or follow the examples portrayed by their religious colleagues.
Individuals decide whether they want to take morals from their caregivers or not. Believing in God, therefore, does not in any way determine whether one will be moral or not. Reading from the religious books exposes some negative aspects of people who believed in God yet engaged in immoral acts. There are plenty of cases involving destruction, greed, drama, and disobedience like Adam and Eve did. The first parents, from religious accounts in Islam and Christianity, were aware that God had forbidden the fruit and even though they were aware that God exists, they ate the fruit. The philosophical question of whether non-believers can be highly moral people has been taken by some renowned scholars like John Frame and Paul Kurtz.
Frame argued that if ethics require God, then agnostics and atheists would not be recognizing moral standards (Frame 45-48). Even the bible acknowledge the fact that these people have unique and absolute principles that guide their conduct. It should, however, be noted that people who observe the moral guidelines are without a good reason tend to be loose in the manner that they accept their provisions because of lacking a rational basis. Denying the existence of God makes the world connect its origin to impersonal forces like motion, chance and time. These impersonal objects or forces cannot or are incapable of justifying ethical obligations. It is from this standpoint that Frame argued that an impersonal universe does not impose any forms of absolute obligations (Frame 50).
Kurtz also believed that one does not have to be religious and believe in God in order to be a highly moral person (Kurtz 23-25). He argued that there are many infamous deeds that were carried out in the name of God. The deeds include the religiously inspired terrorism evident in Palestine, crusades and the events that took place in Yugoslavia. From these accounts, it becomes difficult to hold the belief that God is the only one who guarantees morality. Kurtz came to the conclusion that human beings would be wrong if they insist that only those who accept and embrace the teachings in the religious dogma are moral. Religionists have been for a long time derived contradictory moral commandments despite counting on the same God. For example, Muslims believe in polygamy, considering it to be divinely inspired. On the other hand, Christians, particularly the Catholics, believe in monogamy and do not embrace divorce. The Jews and the Protestants embrace divorce although under certain circumstances.
Solving moral disagreements is possible regardless of the religious practices of the people involved in a disagreement. Finding solutions to problems facing humanity has been the cause of the peace that we are experiencing in the whole world. One might argue that there is no peace because of the anarchic nature of our international relations. However, it is worth appreciating the fact that perpetual peace cannot be achieved and that is why there are several cases of reported conflicts around the world. Regardless the religion that one believes in, it is important always to make reasonable, lucid and verifiable assertions that are anchored on pragmatic and observable pieces of evidence in support of the conflicting ideas and beliefs. Failing to appreciate this possibility and the need for peace has seen other religions relying on their subjective nature of arguments and beliefs in the guide for their actions. As a result, many wars have ended up being fought for lacking common grounds upon which religious ideas should be grounded. Despite the religious commitments that people make, the moral dimensions of people’s lives are yet to be fully explored and determined.
Moral disputes have for a long time proven to be more challenging compared other forms like the political differences. To an extent, political disagreements end up taking moral stands like the views on abortion where the pro-life and pro-choice debate became a hot debatable issue. In some communities, some unacceptable practices like honor killings are held in great awe with the people regarded as a disgrace to the family and community ending up being killed. Coming up with a solution to such a problem requires the observance of the divine commands. However, to achieve this, it is paramount to establish which is the true faith, an issue that is highly debatable. However, a neutral ground can be established by considering the ideas and ideal of classical scholars who were objective and liberal in their thinking like Plato. Borrowing from his teacher’s lessons in school and life experience, Plato wanted to understand Socrates fate and come up with solutions to the moral disagreements and injustices. Plato argued that the appeals to God wisdom were not relevant in guiding moral righteousness regardless of the faiths to be considered (Arendt 418-420). From this argument, it turns out moral disagreements can be resolved if people detach themselves from religious believes.
Conclusively, murder is an immoral act that should be condemned because God’s original intentions were meant to make people procreate and fill the world among other reasonable grounds. However, the immorality of supporting murder goes beyond the existence of God, because even the atheists and agnostics consider the act to be wrong. To be highly moral is not an aspect that is determined by the belief in the existence of God. There are many highly moral individuals in the society that do not believe in the existence of God. In these cases, the people are guided by the values and the principles that they learned during childhood. Being highly moral is thus an innate aspect of human beings that is nurtured and shaped in the right environment. Lastly, our different religious beliefs have not bared people in finding solutions to the moral challenges that face them. The reliance on empirical findings and objective reasoning has facilitated peace and encouraged tolerance although there are a few conservatives who are subjective in the manner that they solve moral disagreements resulting in conflicts. The aspect of moral disagreements witnessed today was still in existence 2300 years ago when Plato urged people not to entirely rely on the concept of God in finding solutions to moral issues.

Works Cited
Arendt, Hannah. “Thinking and moral considerations: A lecture.” Social Research (1971): 417 446.
Frame, John M. “Euthyphro, Hume, and the Biblical God.” (2011): 45-50.
Kurtz, Paul. Living Without Religion: Eupraxophy. Prometheus Books, 1994.

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Receive Paper In 3 Hours
Calculate the Price
275 words
First order 10%
Total Price:
$10.99 $35.97
Calculating ellipsis
Hire an expert
This discount is valid only for orders of new customer and with the total more than 25$
This sample could have been used by your fellow student... Get your own unique essay on any topic and submit it by the deadline.

Find Out the Cost of Your Paper

Get Price