Why Secular Morality is Superior

[Tempus]

---

A vacuous point that applies equally to you anyway. Why don't you argue your point with the Chinese or Russians and tell them they have to apply morality as Christianity sees it? You should become a citizen of one of those countries and then tell them. And? All it demonstrates in either formulation is the unwillingness of China or Russia to adopt people's pet morality.

Also, "the ones in power" write laws in every country, by extension determining morality (at least to some degree; i.e., killing is wrong, etc.). However, this ignores the fact that in secular first world countries the ones in power are elected representatives. The US, UK, Australia, Japan, Sweden, to name a few (I know not all of them are technically secular), are not dictatorships (which I acknowledge you haven't said) and elect people to represent the population. Despite their problems they're very good places to live. You make it sound (perhaps unintentionally or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you) as if secularity leads to oppressive regimes, or that the ones in power don't determine law in non-secular countries, neither of which is true. The ones in power determine morality to some degree in every country. The difference is in how far they go and how heavy handed they are in enforcing it.

---

Why in secular morality is murder considered immoral, why can't it be considered moral? There are those who do not think murder is immoral, why should they have to be forced to live by the morality of the majority. All the atheist and nonbelievers I've spoken to do not believe they should have to live by God's moral code, necessarily, yet the majority in this country believe that God's moral code is better than the rest.

I was arguing against your point that "[s]ecular morality is what the ones in power determine it to be". You haven't conceded the point or challenged my refutation. To recap my response:

1. The ones in power in all countries write laws which, to some extent, determine the moral code of that society regardless of whether they're secular or not.
   
2. Those in power in secular countries are, for the most part, elected representatives.
   
3. Many secular countries have laws protecting minorities against mob rule.
   

So no, secular morality* isn't what "the ones in power determine it to be".

---

*I'll point out here that I'm aware my posts come close to conflating secular morality and secular law, however, in the context of challenging the "those in power" point I think it's a fair response. Secular morality on its own is obviously not determined by people in power since a secular ethics can be developed by anyone who feels so inclined - entirely in their head if they want.