It’s conceptual, subjective, and largely relative. Morality is nothing without the human mind, it’s a concept, it does not exist in nature or universally. We think it up and have our own opinions, thus it is relative and purely conceptual. The concept of morality would/will die with the end of mankind.

Morality is made by humans not by religion.

Religious teachings are a result of peoples mortality not the other Way around.

The simple answer is, "morality."

Religion is one of many structures of moral values, not the center of all of it.

“Be excellent to each other.”

Basic human decency and common sense

You have no morality if you need a book to tell you what is right or wrong.

You have no morality if it's only fear of god/hell that keeps you from doing the wrong thing.

You have no morality if the idea of heaven or salvation is the carrot that gets you to do the right thing. Santa claus for grown-ups.

Most people ought to be able to figure out the "golden rule" - treat others as you wish to be treated. You don't need a religion for that, you are deficient if you do.

It's a much better form of morality because it is done without any promise of a reward in heaven or threat of punishment in hell, since both of those places only exist in the imaginations of credulous people.

The idea that atheists are somehow less moral than believers is incorrect and downright stupid. There is absolutely no data to support the idea that atheists as a group are any less moral than any other randomly chosen group of people. In fact, just the opposite is true; for example, atheists are much less likely to wind up in jail.

It's a sad fact that people who hold these silly beliefs never stop and ask themselves if they have any data or facts to support those beliefs. Believers tend not to ever question their beliefs.

What is morality with fear of eternal damnation?

Much cleaner and more sensible, with emphasis on outcomes and reduction of suffering.

Something where people put thought into what is right and wrong instead of trusting some rules written however long ago.

Plus look at scientology. The guy believes in a space overlord that took aliens in airplanes to earth and then nuked them and the foul spirits must be purged from our body.

Most religions are stuck in the past. Also so many rules are broken that it makes following the rest just silly.

Why is a God that tormented a dad into thinking he had to kill his own son moral? Why did he torment Job?

Actual morality.

On it's own, morality is humanity's attempt at creating a ruleset for society that promotes cooperation for survival, rather than a society that thrives on power and influence exclusively. Religion ultimately twists this for control over its worshipers in the worst cases, which is pretty ironic.

We're uniquely capable of contemplating the consequences of our actions thanks to the sheer luck of having complex brains. Working with your neighbor on a hunt, rather than fighting him to steal his captured game, would likely be more beneficial in the long term. Nothing about the content of our collective morality is special, but more or less convenient, and the things we think are "bad" could have ended up as "good" if they had worked out favorably.

Survival

Religion gives you a set of rationals for moral behavior. The alternative is making up the rules as you go along.

Morality is a term to define the quality of behavior to things outside yourself. Religion can be a source of your moral construct but your moral construct can be created outside of religion. Other ways people regulate there behavior stem from experiences and weather they serve or hurt you. What seems valid stays and what doesn't goes. A person could have no religion and be moral. A person in a religion can be immoral.

Social animals have the capacity to coexist. Wolves can live together without killing each other and they don't have religion.

Ethics! And it’s an important topic because it is impossible to be ethical if your morality comes from an authority like religion.

If your morality comes from an authority such as religion, then all it takes is for you to be convinced that a heinous act against humanity and society is the will of god. Terrorism, slavery, treating women as property, etc, all happened because a holy book (The Bible and the Quran) said it was ok.

Ethics, or true morality without authority, demands that we treat each other with excellence simply because it is the right thing to do. It spreads love, happiness, and joy. Why? Who knows, maybe it’s an evolutionary trait showing how humanity chooses to survive, through cooperation and community. Or maybe it speaks to some deeper nature of reality, as if love itself is a fundamental force of the universe.

I would never trust someone who believed morality came from religion or an authoritative god character. They have proven time and time again that their morality is a thinly veiled excuse for control, abuse, prejudice, hatred, and violence.

law.

It's a purer type of morality because it's not achieved/enforced by a fear of eternal damnation.

Nearly every religion has a version of the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

Morality is easy for me in most cases. Would I like it if someone did that to me? If the answer is “no” it is likely hurtful and immoral.

Basically the same, but sourced from a different set of texts.

Counter Question. How do you religious folk explain how we survived (aka didn't kill, cheat and steal) before your religion was invented? We must've had a set of priciples to facilitate cooperation though the millennia, otherwise we would've perished. I'll wait.

If you need a god to tell you to be a good person, you are not a good person

​

If you only thing keeping you from raping and murdering is the fear of punishment from Sky daddy...you are not a good person.

​

Morality in the absence of religion is....empathy? Not wanting to harm others?

The founders of the U. S. Constitution eliminated religion from our govt. structure. They knew history and that religion offers only a distorted view of true morality. They knew that morality is determined BY THE PEOPLE, not by religion or a Bible. I think the ‘table’ of moral truth has 4 legs; individual experience, history, science and continual respectful dialogue.

I know that this is a vague and simplistic thought, but society to me was developed as an agreement between people that boils down to i will not kill or threaten you and yours if you promise not to kill or threaten me and mine.

Morality is nothing more than thinking and actions that help to uphold and maintain this agreement. We feel a need to take care of people so that they do not slip below the threshold to where they will do whatever it takes to survive. We are nice to people so as not to create enemies that now have motivating to threaten our survival.

As an agnostic and borderline atheist this line of thinking makes sense to me. Nowhere else in nature will you find a family of animals that cares about the survival of outsiders. We are the same but with the added benefit of a frontal cortext that allows us higher level thinking to create a social structure that goes beyond out family.

I think that we would find very quickly how low on our hierarchy of needs “morality” is if society started to crumble. We would do whatever it takes to make sure ourselves and family survives to see the next day.

I realize that this is too simplistic and a macabre thought to many people, but it is what makes sense to me.

This is not how i experience this human experiment, but it is the only way that i can rationalize the concept of morality in the absence of religion.

I still am respectful to people and truly want the best for others. I donate my time to charity and feel gutted if i see people in pain or struggling. But in the back of my mind i know that this privilege to experience and honor these feelings goes away if society begins to unravel.

What do you guys think?

So as not to be misconstrued, I’m pretty agnostic and have just been pondering this question and was interested in what others think.

You don’t have to downvote my question, it’s not a loaded question!!! I’m just wondering what everyone thinks!

Morality is subjective to the society that creates them.

Dictated by the law

[removed]

More objective. Id argue that as we learn more about our minds through neuroscience and psychology, we can make better moral claims about human well being. A good example are LGBT rights over the past 100 years as we have understood sexuality through genetics and psychology as opposed to sin.

No religion is vastly better than getting morals from people 3000 years ago. Or whenever depending on which god you prefer.

Laudable for its own sake, rather than performed in order to secure eternal life...

Depends. Religion was really a scheme to molest children and make money this whole time and ALOT of people fell for it...I have no following statement.

Morality that doesn't have a deciding figurehead.

Just plain old morality.

Not the Spanish Inquisition

People with no moral basis in religion conclude that morality is subjective. Which is wrong, it is very objective. No society or people past or present has ever tolerated a thief for example. No society has ever tolerated a murderer. There are things, more than the two examples I give, that are wrong universally whether people in this day tolerate them or not. And some people past and present tolerate other evils. That doesn’t change what they are.

A good conscience#

Actual morality, vice extortion.

Man has an indelible moral character stamped on his conscience by the Creator - this much is true. Man does indeed have an inherent moral sense. That said, religion, and particularly the one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, is absolutely necessary to fully understand and express the depths of morality, especially moral standards which far outweigh mere human conceptions of morality.