It's not an ethical judgment, it's aesthetic.
I suppose the distinction could be argued for some time.
I think that it's worth recalling at this point that this particular discussion of the connection between belief and ethics, or morality if you prefer, began when a post cited a religious authority's claim that only a Godless regime could commit genocide.
I don't claim that atheists are more ethical than believers. As I've said, I don't think ethics has any connection to belief. I do get a wee bit piqued, though, when believers gravely announce that only people like me could possibly do evil. It seems unfair, and it seems untrue. So I naturally, if not always logically, respond by pointing out that the ethical track record of believers is not visibly superior to that of non-believers.
For some of us, you see, non-belief is simply a matter of honesty. I cannot believe in virgin birth, original sin, redemption through crucifixion, or ascension into heaven. I can't believe in the big daddy God up there judging us all. I couldn't as a child and I can't now. So I choose between being an open unbeliever or being a liar, and pretending to believe.
I would be perfectly happy to let the issue of the connection between belief and ethics lie dead forever, and to evaluate people wholly according to their actions. I simply wish that the religious would do the same, and stop pointing the finger at me and those like me, accusing us of being incipient monsters with genocidal tendencies. |
