Where our morals come from can differ significantly. Personally mine come mainly from my parents' teaching and my own views of society as a whole, I am able to make my own mind and think critically on every problem, putting pro and con arguments and making my final decision (that can be changed if latter a better argument is presented). Personally I think the majority of morals tends to be subjective, however I also believe a small circle (eg not killing, killing is wrong etc) to be objective simply because all society regardless of religion has embraced such morals (only a minority of mentally ill people will support murder as a recreational activity)

What's so moral about being a Christian? After all, Paul told Christians not to help widows under sixty years old at all or those over sixty unless they pass a test. Maybe that's why Repubs hate social programs that help needy people.

(May 11, 2014 at 9:39 pm)leodeo Wrote: but seems frequently christian people tell me that without god we are all douches and if it wasn't for god there would be no good in mankind - so what do we say again for that?

Just tell theist the following phrase - If the only reason why you don't rob, rape and murder is God, then you must have a serious mental problem

(June 27, 2014 at 12:21 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Your bible

a simple response to the OP

"Same place you got yours" - let that hang, smell the air for smoke.
:edited for content:

Where we get our morality is a difficult question because nobody really knows how morality works. So religious people can pretend they know, making non-religious people look bad for answering the question honestly. One of William Lane Craig's standard jabs is that materialism doesn't explain objective morals (aka moral realism). The problem is that, on the whole, religion doesn't explain it any better. It claims to do so, but the support for that claim is never flushed out. "Because God" is not an explanation of morality, no matter how many times you repeat it. It's a claim. Not an explanation.

Many theists are far too willing to just accept moral realism and many atheists far too willing to abandon it, neither generally having very good reasons for doing so.

(June 26, 2014 at 6:25 am)naimless Wrote: What are your reasons not to murder? How are they not potentially consequential?

I know you weren't asking me, but I just have to say I have never had the desire to kill anyone....

I got my morality from star dust. Works great.

(July 3, 2014 at 6:16 pm)MindForgedManacle Wrote: Many theists are far too willing to just accept moral realism and many atheists far too willing to abandon it, neither generally having very good reasons for doing so.

Our experiences and beliefs are a product of viewing reality through the lenses of experience and human cognition. Objective morality is an untenable abstract ideal necessary to maintain because it gives us a goal to strive towards.

Our morality doesn't have to come from an outside source to reach toward a goal, any less than Honor needs to be objective for people to behave honorably.

They're fables we tell ourselves, because we realize they improve the human condition for everyone.

What feels morally right or wrong objectively isn't actually objective. It's historical consensus.

That's why slavery seems objectively morally wrong now, but wasn't in the past. It's why treating women as property seems objectively wrong now, but wasn't universally considered as such in the past. Because an objective source does not exist. In the Bible you see Lot appeal to a moral standard outside of God to convince God to spare the innocent of Sodom.

That standard is Don Quixote's untraceable star. Doesn't matter if it doesn't exist; it matters that we tell ourselves it does.