ideas against religious morality

westboro baptist church

• A small number of conservative Christians in the USA argue that all elements of society should be brought under the control of Old Testament law. 

• This is known as Theonomy or Christian Reconstructionism – morality is dependent on the rules ordained by God. 

• God alone has the position of determining what’s right or wrong, therefore ‘Our obligation to keep God’s commands cannot be judged by any extra-scriptual standard, such as whether its specific requirements are congenial to past traditions or modern feelings and practices” (G Bahsen). 

• In practice, this could require the execution of homosexuals, blasphemers and adulterers; an end to freedom of religion and expression, and even the re-instatement of slavery. 

• One headline declares: “Thank God for 18 more dead troops, we wish it were 18,000”. 

• The website, which argues that it preaches ‘Gospel truth’ is clearly running counter not only to secular morality but to most religious moral teaching. 

• It seems counterintuitive to argue that God teaches hate, as they maintain. 

the quiverful movement

• Many members of the movement also espouse a view known as biblical patriarchy, which advocates male leadership in the home and wider society. It is believed that the woman was created as a helper for the husband and the bearer of children. 

• The Quiverfull is a branch of Evangelical Christians which advocates large families and highly conservative domestic arrangements. Followers reject all forms of contraception and birth control, including the rhythm method, as they believe God is the rightful gatekeeper of the woman’s womb. 

• Biblical parenting and home schooling are also advocated: ‘Christian parents must provide their children with a thoroughly Christian education, one that teaches the Bible and a biblical view of God and the world. They do not agree with state education as it is not God-ordained. 

the euthyphro dilemma

• are God’s commands good because they come from God? Or are they good because they conform to some other, independent standard of goodness? 

• If whatever God says is automatically good then an issue arises because God might command us to do things which we might see as being cruel or unjust. And we would have to do them because if God is the source of goodness then, however strange it may seem, we would have to do them because they are, by definition, morally right. 

voluntarism solution

• It is possible to respond to the claim that God’s commands are arbitrary by stating that – as God is typically believed to be omnibenevolent – that He would never command anything that does not reflect His essentially loving nature. 

• The notion that moral principles are not independent rational principles but instead are creations of God’s will (in Latin, voluntas) is known as Voluntarism. 

• A criticism of voluntarism is that if God does create moral goodness, then we can’t meaningfully say about God himself that he is morally good. According to voluntarism, moral goodness simply resides with that which God commands. This isn’t a problem when it comes to human beings. To say that David or Jim are morally good simply means that they do what God tells them to. However, when we apply this definition of moral goodness to God, we end up saying simply that ‘God commands whatever He commands’, and the notion of divine moral goodness, of God himself being morally good, therefore seems to have been lost. 

intellectualism solution

• to argue that God’s commands conform to an independent standard of goodness. 

• This view has been defended by Aquinas and is known as intellectualism. 

• According to Aquinas, God is an inherently rational being, and so his commands must therefore conform to any reasonable, independent standard of rationality (as opposed to goodness). 

• A criticism of intellectualism is that if God is not setting the standards of goodness then we might feel entitled to bypass God completely, as he is no longer worthy of worship. After all, why should we worship a God who is bound by the same moral rules as the rest of us? 

W.L.Craig’s response to euthyphro dilemma

• there is a 3rd alternative: god wills something because HE is good

• god’s own nature determines what is good.

• god’s commandments are rooted in god’s essence, meaning his commands are good

• BUT: evil and suffering

R.A Sharpe: The Moral Case Against Religious Belief

• Challenges what he claims to be a misconception that if more people believed in God there would be less immorality 

• Religious belief undermines independent moral judgment by prioritizing obedience to divine commands. 

• Morality based solely on God’s will leads to arbitrariness and ignores intrinsic moral values. 

• Acting morally due to fear of punishment or hope for reward diminishes genuine virtue. 

• Moral Stagnation: Religious dogmatism hinders ethical progress, perpetuating outdated or harmful practices. 

• Secular Morality: Sharpe asserts that morality can and should exist independently of religion, grounded in reason and empathy. 

• ‘Is it remotely conceivable that God should be interested in whether people use a condom rather than the rhythm method of contraception?’ The Catholic Church says that those who use contraception are sinners. On what authority can they claim this to be true? Do religious people really have higher moral standards? Surely bringing a child into the world that would be neglected by its parents is more immoral. 

EVALUATION OF SHARPE: dogmatism (S)

• Sharpe contends that religious belief fosters dogmatism, leading adherents to adhere rigidly to doctrines and resist moral progress. He argues that religion often imposes fixed moral codes, which can become outdated and incompatible with modern ethical challenges. 

• Support: Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion (2006), echoes this critique, arguing that religion discourages critical thinking and moral autonomy by demanding unquestioning faith. 

EVALUATION OF SHARPE: dogmatism (W-counter)

Alasdair MacIntyre, however, in After Virtue (1981), defends religious traditions as repositories of moral wisdom, arguing that they provide a coherent framework for understanding virtues. MacIntyre suggests that religious moral systems can evolve and adapt without losing their core principles, countering Sharpe’s claim that they necessarily stagnate. 

EVALUATION OF SHARPE: the prob of outdated moral codes (S)

• Sharpe critiques religious moral codes for being anchored in historical contexts that no longer align with contemporary ethical values. He cites examples such as scriptural endorsements of slavery or the subjugation of women as evidence that religious morality can perpetuate injustice. 

• Support: Christopher Hitchens, in God Is Not Great (2007), supports this view, arguing that religious moral systems are often “frozen” in time and fail to adapt to evolving human rights standards. 

EVALUATION OF SHARPE: the prob of outdated moral codes (W-counter)

Rowan Williams, former Archbishop of Canterbury, argues that religious traditions are capable of critical self-reflection and reform. For instance, many Christian denominations have reinterpreted scripture to support gender equality and human rights, illustrating adaptability.

nietzche + master morality

• Nietzsche regarded genuine or acceptable morality to be a ‘master morality’ – one which is given by brave and strong-willed men. 

• The noble man is conscious of determining what is right and wrong. He realises what is harmful and what is valuable, and creates values according to this awareness. 

• Because this is a self-autonomous, relativist view of ethics, Nietzsche saw the moral individual as the master, rather than the slave. This is drawn by an analogy with the classical world; we could be like the heroes of old. 

• Since ethical people are self-autonomous, there is no place for God in this approach to ethics. 

nietzche + slave morality

• Thanks to religion, Nietzsche thought that there had been a ‘slave revolt in morals’ – a terrible event which turned human values upside down. 

• Nietzsche defined the ideas of this revolt as a ‘slave morality’: a series of beliefs which originates among the weak of society. Slave morality does not exert strength, but questions the values of the masters and seeks to enslave them too. 

• Nietzsche rejected the idea of the majority finding the common good, because “what is common is of little value”. Christians and their successors have supported slavish values like humility, mercy, and forgiveness. All of these things seek to topple the rule of the strong. 

• Nietzsche hope for an end to established religious values, with a return to the heroism of the classical world.