Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alansmithee
I think the alternate (no objective morality) is worse than using religion to serve as a solid moral base. Then where there is wrongdoing, there is a basis to look back upon that is for the most part agreed upon.
|
This is the flaw in your logic. You don't need religion to have a moral base. Religion is simply an attempt to explore the nature of existence. Morality was included by the founders of the religion because it's the perfect place to insert rules that make society work, but you can adopt those rules (which can pretty much be broken down to the Golden Rule, incidentally) without believing in God. In the case of Christianity, the last six commandments are fine, but the government telling people to obey the first four is in violation of the First Amendment.