Fundie Claim #10: No god, no moral codes

5/20/2008 | 8:42 PM | Evolved Rationalist

Fundie: The Bible [or insert other so-called holy books here] is the basis for morality! Without it, there would be no moral codes and everything would be permissible. Without god, people would have no reason to be moral, and Christians are more moral than atheists because we believe in a god. God exists, and the Bible is the true source of morality and we need it as a moral guide.

Fundie theistards who believe that there is no reason to be moral unless god exists have weaker morals than atheists who act morally without the fear of hellfire and damnation. The truly scary thing is that theistards who use this claim are actually admitting that without their faith in a sky-daddy, they would be running around the streets killing people, committing crimes and going (even more) batshit crazy. Considering the fact that most people are theistards, doesn't thinking about this send chills up your spine?

Theistards, if you need to delude yourselves about an imaginary sky-daddy and an imaginary hell to behave morally and to prevent yourself from killing others or raping children, I suggest that you check yourself into a mental institution at once.


Religion appeals to cowards and the intellectually lazy because it frees them from the burden of actually thinking for themselves. They choose to remain in a state of moral retardation, and are more than willing to hand over their depraved minds to pulpit-pounders. Bible-thumping Christians might object to this description by wailing “The Bible!! Bibleeeee!! The Bible is the source for my morality, and the Bible is the word of the LORD GOD because it says so!! Praise Jesus!!”

Idiot fundies, please take some time to consider what I’ve been saying time and time again: Christians have no confidence in mapping the course of their lives, choosing instead to take their imaginary sky-god’s orders, whose so-called Word is interpreted by – guess who – mortal men! In the end, Christians who so hate worldly opinions on how to live their lives, come back to square one by relying on humans to interpret the screamingly inconsistent scripture.

This is why Christians cannot even agree among themselves what’s moral in the cases of, for example, homosexuality, divorce, abortion, birth control and euthanasia. If god was so clear about morals, why is there such confusion? Wouldn’t the solution to these dilemmas be clear-cut and written plainly in the Bible? Why don’t they just ask god what to do, since they claim that god is the basis of morality? The blunt truth is that these Christians are simply back at square one. In the end, they are still relying on fellow men, if not themselves, in making moral judgments. More often then not, their moral judgments will be seriously warped due to the twisting and cherry picking of scripture to support a particular view. The additional fact that the Bible can be used to support nearly every point of view doesn’t make things any easier either.

Now, the most important question: Even if there really is no basis for morality if god doesn’t exist, and even if atheism did lead to atheists turning into infant-murderers, how does this have any bearing on the real question of the existence of god? All these philosophical skirmishes do not bear any weight on the issue of the Christian god’s, or any other god’s existence.

Christians, are you really that arrogant, deluded, and stupid to think that before your idiotic cult infected the world, or before the Bible, there was never any moral codes in place? Have you ever heard of the Code of Hammurabi which was secular? Are you theistards going to instead close your eyes and avoid dealing with the facts again, just as you have closed your eyes and shut your brains in the face of anything that could ever make you doubt your moronic beliefs all these years?

If you enjoyed this post Subscribe to our feed


  1. Post-Diluvian Diaspora |

    i think there are 2 claims that are getting mixed together (and they're not necessarily fundie claims):

    (1) God is the basis of morality. That is, God's command is what differentiates right from wrong. If God commands X, then X is moral. (There's a good debate about this topic here:

    (2) There is no motivation to act morally without God.

    Both are rather silly though.

  2. Euthyphro |

    If god is the basis of morality, then morality is not objective. If objective morality exists, then there is some standard greater than god, and he is not necessary for morality.

    I've been saying this for more than 2000 goddamned years, and people still don't listen...

  3. Abraham |

    Why do Christians worry about morality? Morality shouldn't matter to them, only obedience.

    If our god tells us to sacrifice our child to him, we must follow his commandments and not concern ourselves with questions of morality.

    You only need to obey, obey, obey!

  4. Abraham |

    We Jews eventually understood this.

    Christians, you don't want to wander in the desert for 40 years, do you?

  5. christislord12 |

    Christianity is the basis for morality because the Bible is the only true revelation of G-d. All the other holy books are lies!

  6. Anonymous |

    Hey Christislord12, there is some Moslem who wants you beheaded for that.

  7. jim |



  8. Created Rationalist |


    Can't we settle for a supreme beings standerd of morality being the trancendant standard being that it would be above any human standard?

  9. Mike O'Risal |

    Yes, what would the world do without the presence of religious morality? How would people living in poverty and ignorance ever find their needed justification for killing witches if it weren't for the activities of missionaries to bring them word from the Great White Father that it was all right to do so?

    Imagine all those sleepless nights in the Central African Republic...

  10. Euthyphro |


    Then you agree that objective morality doesn't exist, and is subject to the whims of your god.

  11. Novan Leon |

    The Christian argument isn't that there would be NO morality without God, there just wouldn't be any MEANING to morality without God.

    For Christians, morality is about authority. If the supreme authority says something is wrong, it is wrong.

    For secularists, morality is about social efficiency. Morality is merely a code of behavior in order to facilitate human coexistence.

    It's impossible to rationalize secular morality with any kind of authority. There is no authority other than the one a group of humans holds over another by threat of force. It is possible, however, to provide evidence for Christian authority-based morality providing a equitable code of behavior for human coexistence.

  12. Murf |

    That was an interesting rant about Christians and moral codes, but no answer to the basic conundrum that all of us (Christian, atheist, Muslim, Hindu, etc. etc.) have a moral code from which we cannot escape. This a huge problem for evolutionists because there can be no transcendent moral law given the assumption of evolution. Funny thing is we live as if there were. So we are quite free to condemn what we perceive as wrong (murder, rape, child abuse) when we have no basis for proving that it is, in fact, wrong. Indeed, given the assumption of evolution, one can only have the personal opinion that something is wrong. In truth what the other guy does is simply nature "red in tooth and claw."

    Too bad you atheists can't live with the natural end of your philosophy. have no answer here. Why must I be subject to anyone else's view of what is moral and what is not, given the assumption of evolution?

  13. Created Rationalist |

    Re: Eurythro,

    Yes, however the Christian God is uniform and unchanging, he may make a way to get around a moral law but it is never abrogated, it is always there (note; moral laws should not be confused with the many civil laws in the bible given to the nation of Israel, they are not perminent). However the moral laws given by God are, so although there is no objective standard of morality in the purest sense, there can still exist a standard of morality which is independant of any human opinion.

  14. Creationist |

    Murf is right!

    Shalini Sehkar EXPOSED as a liar!!!!

  15. Ponder |

    Of course you can have an evolved moral code. Instinctive behaviour that allows a society to operate (remember that most primates live in groups and we ARE primates) will be subject to evolutionary forces as much as anything else. Altruism can evolve as part of a larger gene pool, something that helps that gene pool flourish as opposed to individuals. If everone has an urge to protects all children and assist others it helps your genes to survive as well as thiers.

    By the time you've actually evolved to the point of consciousness, you have an instinctive moral framework to hang more complex moral behaviour on.

  16. Smoke |

    Murf – You are a fucking retard. Societies determine what is moral. If you were a Viking you’d not only think it was moral to rape and kill but you would be revered for it. Wow, you are really fucking stupid. I feel like I am talking to a child who was raised in a turpentine factory. The examples are endless and they all reflect the evolutionary process.

  17. christislord12 |

    The thriving societies of the West that succeed have one thing in common! Christianity!

    Without G-d there can be no Western society!

  18. Smoke |

    Christlord12, You are a bigger fucking moron than Murf-turd. First, you are wrong. Second, stay on topic you ass-sucking whore.

  19. The Watcher |

    Murf said:

    Indeed, given the assumption of evolution, one can only have the personal opinion that something is wrong. In truth what the other guy does is simply nature "red in tooth and claw."

    That's correct. It happens to be a belief most of society shares, but you're right. It's just an opinion.

    Too bad you atheists can't live with the natural end of your philosophy.

    And what "natural end" would that be? I suppose you're going to tell me horror stories about people killing each other for meat and stealing their belongings. While societal dynamics prove you wrong, it's really irrelevant. It doesn't matter that your scenario is horrific and ugly, because if it's true, it's true. And no amount of believing it's not is going to change that.

    So say you're right: that if no God exists, a nasty, brutish, and short existence really is what we're all in for. How is believing in a nonexistent God going to keep that from happening?

    You can't possibly be arguing for enforced, institutionalized ignorance because you're afraid of the consequences otherwise, can you? have no answer here. Why must I be subject to anyone else's view of what is moral and what is not, given the assumption of evolution?

    Well, for one thing, we're not talking about evolution. But since you asked, it's because you live in a society. Read up on Locke and the social contract and you'll find out why.

    But take away the societal trappings and the more basic answer is, you aren't. As much as you may hate it that there's no magical sky-daddy watching over you and keeping you nice 'n' moral, the simple fact is that wishing doesn't make it so. No matter what horrors you can concoct about a world A) without any God and B) where evolution is real, it's all entirely irrelevant. NONE OF IT MATTERS.

    The fact is, reality simply doesn't CARE if you're comfortable with it or not. It just is, and no amount of wishing, begging, or praying is going to change that.

    I can't convince you that God doesn't exist, or that evolution does (and frankly, I don't really want to). But I do hope I can convince you to stop making idiotic appeals to consequence, as if this wishing and hoping for a better outcome is somehow indicative of its being true.

  20. christislord12 |

    I am male!

  21. Anonymous |


    There is no conundrum, Evolution is what has brought us to moral codes. We would not have survived as a species without them. These codes (though mangled and altered by superstition throughout the ages) predate the religions you mention. Unfortunately, religion has hijacked these principles in order to make them their own.

  22. smoke |

    I commend you. I don't the patience you do. This is something I need to work on.


    Not only are you an idiot but you are sexist as well. You are a male whore. Make that, a male-ass-sucking-whore taking payment in the make believe currency of your big daddy. Do you scream DADDY when you are servicing him?

  23. The Watcher |


    Thanks. I used to be a special ed teacher for kids in in-patient care. Comes with the territory.

  24. Novan Leon |

    @smoke: Please make all kinds of obscene remarks about me, ok? A few unfounded accusations would help too, thanks. :)

    On a more serious note. The entire debate here is centered around whether there is an objective morality or not. If not, morality is merely a social tool to facilitate human coexistence and survival. If there is, then there must be some kind of basis on which this objective moral code is founded (such as God's authority). In the end it all comes down to, "is there a God or not?". This goes hand-in-hand with my "morality based on authority" or "morality based on social efficiency" statement.

  25. Anonymous |

    Novan Leon,

    You are quite wrong in everything you say.Take away god and you still have morality developing. It is that simple that anyone should realize it in the 21st century. Unfortunately, theists are blind and so programmed to their dogma that irrational views of the world continue unabated to this day. Let us hope that one day this foolishness will end.

  26. Creationist |

    Christislord12, when DARWINISTS cannot answer our questions they insult us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    SMOKE EXPOSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  27. Smoke |


    I exposed your mother last night after answering all of her questions.

  28. Laser Potato |

    "Fundie: The Bible [or insert other so-called holy books here] is the basis for morality! Without it, there would be no moral codes and everything would be permissible."
    Which explains altruistic behavior in gorillas and wolves...wait, what?!

  29. Laser Potato |

    I think I need to bring up Bronze Dog's post on this subject again.

    "If There Were No Traffic Cops...
    ...would you turn the road into a demolition derby?
    It seems some fundie commenters might just answer 'yes.' Take a break to read the nihilism of a troll my circle of friends is quite familiar with.
    I don't need law enforcement of the natural or supernatural kind to behave. I have compassion for my fellow sentient beings. When I'm at the grocery store, I put up shopping carts that barbarians placed in the exact center of good parking spots. If I take an item off the shelf, and the remainder are way in the back, hard to reach, I will bring a few closer to the front for the next person's convenience. And that's just the tiniest of things I do. (Need to start getting my checkbook ready for a slew of donations, by the way.)
    Why do I do these things? Well, for starters, the world would be a better place if everyone was generous. Altruism helps everyone, and altruism helps oneself: People have an instinct for reciprocation:
    "Scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours."
    "Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself."
    It's the concept behind returning a favor. Doing kind things for others makes them more willing to do kind things for you. Hence, if I want something kind to be done for me, I should be kind to others. If I don't want nasty things done to me, I shouldn't do nasty things to others. It's probably written in our DNA somewhere. It's also taught to most of us at early ages. Even if it's not explicitly taught, we tend to learn by observation.
    For the typical divine command theorist, such concepts are alien: They only know obedience, not love or compassion. They typically require bribery (Heaven) and blackmail (Hell) to reach a decision. When I try to imagine what it's like to be one of them, I think of an animal just barely intelligent enough to understand the concept of deferring gratification. This animal is locked in a cage, separated from all other members of its kind, and is promised a reward from the food slot if they hit the right sequence of buttons. They don't care what the buttons do (no matter how horrible it is), just whether or not something will come tumbling down from the machine."

  30. Creationist |

    The Bible is greater than history fraud!!!!!!!

  31. Laser Potato |

    I'm starting to think Creationist is the reincarnation of Jesusfreak, your old blog's pet troll. I remember how he would go on and on how DNA supposedly did not exist because it wasn't mentioned in the Bible, yet when I reminded him that things like plastic and tomatoes weren't in the Bible either, he would promptly cut me off. Good times.


Post a Comment