Myth: Atheists are Only Good Because Christians Force them to be Good
Myth:
It has been said that atheists can be good people. When atheists are being good, their goodness is being measured on the scale of other religions. We impose our practices onto atheists and then call their behavior good. Atheism is the religion of getting away with anything.
Response:
Religious theists' arguments against atheists' ability to be moral are frequently condescending and bigoted, but this myth about atheists' morality is not only all of that, but adds in unmitigated arrogance as well.
Evidently, atheists are not able to be moral on their own, but theists are; thus we only see so-called "moral" behavior from atheists because religious theists — Christians, to be specific — force atheists to behave according to their religious standards. That's not morality, right?
Every single aspect of the above myth is either factually incorrect or flat-out bigotry. Starting with the first statement, notice that the speaker distances themselves from the claim that atheists can be good — "it has been said" is a way of noting that the claim is made, but implying that the claim is baseless. Furthermore, the claim is merely that atheists can be good people — the speaker won't even consider the possibility that atheists are good people.
The second statement insists that when atheists are said to be "good," it's only when measured against religious standards. When a religious person is making the claim, perhaps that is true. When a Christian says that an atheist is or can be good, it's possible that they are saying "according to traditional standards of Christian morality," this atheist is good.
That is not, however, the only basis for saying that atheists are or can be good. We also have good secular standards of morality and behavior — one set of such standards is called the law, which in America, at least, is not religious. Thus while it is possible to judge atheists on the basis of religious ethics, it certainly isn't necessary, nor should we assume that it's most common.
The third statement is the assertion that "we" (religious theists generally, but Christians in particular) impose "our practices" on atheists. What is meant here is apparently how the law imposes certain standards of behavior on atheists; yet while it is true that the law imposes standards of behavior, the way it's stated here is all wrong. First, it is not "we Christians" who are doing it, but the state — an impartial actor that represents all citizens, Christian and non-Christian alike. The standards being imposed are not "our Christian" standards, but neutral standards that are independent of any one religion’s traditions, doctrines, or dogmas. It's not "practices" that are imposed on atheists, but simply standards of behavior — Christian and religious practices are not imposed on anyone, but are rather a subject of entirely private choice.
It's true that when standards of behavior are imposed on someone, it's not necessarily correct to call them "moral" for simply obeying orders. Obedience isn't morality, but at most is a pragmatic acceptance of what's expected. This is why atheists sometimes argue that Christian "morality" is nothing of the sort, at least when it consists of simply obeying God's orders. It's rather ironic to find Christians complaining about the lack of morality in people who are having external standards imposed on them when this is precisely what so many think their god does to all of humanity.
Is the same true of atheists, though? Are atheists only "good" because they are obeying the law and don't want to be punished? This might be the case with some atheists, just as it might be the case with some theists. There is, however, no basis in saying that this is true of atheists generally or that it is somehow a logical, moral, or practical consequence of atheism itself.
The final claim, that atheism is a religion for "getting away with anything" is similar to other myths, for example that atheists only reject the existence of gods because they refuse to accept divine rule, that atheists are all hedonists who worship sex, pleasure, and comfort, that atheists have no reasons to care about others, and so forth.
All of these have been dealt with in more detail elsewhere, but all share in common the same element that runs throughout the above myth: anti-atheist bigotry. If we insert "Jews" and "Judaism" into the above myth, it would immediately be recognized as an example of vile anti-Semitism and Christians would fall all over themselves to distance themselves from anyone who said it. Because the myth is about atheists and atheism, though, we hear nary a peep from good, moral Christians.
It has been said that atheists can be good people. When atheists are being good, their goodness is being measured on the scale of other religions. We impose our practices onto atheists and then call their behavior good. Atheism is the religion of getting away with anything.
Response:
Religious theists' arguments against atheists' ability to be moral are frequently condescending and bigoted, but this myth about atheists' morality is not only all of that, but adds in unmitigated arrogance as well.
Evidently, atheists are not able to be moral on their own, but theists are; thus we only see so-called "moral" behavior from atheists because religious theists — Christians, to be specific — force atheists to behave according to their religious standards. That's not morality, right?
Every single aspect of the above myth is either factually incorrect or flat-out bigotry. Starting with the first statement, notice that the speaker distances themselves from the claim that atheists can be good — "it has been said" is a way of noting that the claim is made, but implying that the claim is baseless. Furthermore, the claim is merely that atheists can be good people — the speaker won't even consider the possibility that atheists are good people.
The second statement insists that when atheists are said to be "good," it's only when measured against religious standards. When a religious person is making the claim, perhaps that is true. When a Christian says that an atheist is or can be good, it's possible that they are saying "according to traditional standards of Christian morality," this atheist is good.
That is not, however, the only basis for saying that atheists are or can be good. We also have good secular standards of morality and behavior — one set of such standards is called the law, which in America, at least, is not religious. Thus while it is possible to judge atheists on the basis of religious ethics, it certainly isn't necessary, nor should we assume that it's most common.
The third statement is the assertion that "we" (religious theists generally, but Christians in particular) impose "our practices" on atheists. What is meant here is apparently how the law imposes certain standards of behavior on atheists; yet while it is true that the law imposes standards of behavior, the way it's stated here is all wrong. First, it is not "we Christians" who are doing it, but the state — an impartial actor that represents all citizens, Christian and non-Christian alike. The standards being imposed are not "our Christian" standards, but neutral standards that are independent of any one religion’s traditions, doctrines, or dogmas. It's not "practices" that are imposed on atheists, but simply standards of behavior — Christian and religious practices are not imposed on anyone, but are rather a subject of entirely private choice.
It's true that when standards of behavior are imposed on someone, it's not necessarily correct to call them "moral" for simply obeying orders. Obedience isn't morality, but at most is a pragmatic acceptance of what's expected. This is why atheists sometimes argue that Christian "morality" is nothing of the sort, at least when it consists of simply obeying God's orders. It's rather ironic to find Christians complaining about the lack of morality in people who are having external standards imposed on them when this is precisely what so many think their god does to all of humanity.
Is the same true of atheists, though? Are atheists only "good" because they are obeying the law and don't want to be punished? This might be the case with some atheists, just as it might be the case with some theists. There is, however, no basis in saying that this is true of atheists generally or that it is somehow a logical, moral, or practical consequence of atheism itself.
The final claim, that atheism is a religion for "getting away with anything" is similar to other myths, for example that atheists only reject the existence of gods because they refuse to accept divine rule, that atheists are all hedonists who worship sex, pleasure, and comfort, that atheists have no reasons to care about others, and so forth.
All of these have been dealt with in more detail elsewhere, but all share in common the same element that runs throughout the above myth: anti-atheist bigotry. If we insert "Jews" and "Judaism" into the above myth, it would immediately be recognized as an example of vile anti-Semitism and Christians would fall all over themselves to distance themselves from anyone who said it. Because the myth is about atheists and atheism, though, we hear nary a peep from good, moral Christians.
Source...