Posted on 08/09/2009 7:34:31 AM PDT by MarianoApologeticus
Atheists claim that they are happy, healthy, moral, etc.
The assert that atheism is more moral than theism and that is leads to health, wealth, morality etc.
Yet, consistently, finding via studies and surveys of various sorts cut through the propaganda and demonstrate that atheists are consistently the least charitable, less sociable, more depressed, more immoral than their counterparts.
Even when it comes to societal and political issues and perhaps related to those more activists atheists who define atheism as anti-theism; things do not generally fare very well for atheists.
These links have compiled various studies and other recourses on this matter from The Barna Group, Amer. J. Psychiatry, J. Gerontol. B. Psychol. Sci. Soc Sci., etc., Ann. Epidemiol., Int. J. Psychiatry Med., Can. J. Public Health, et al.:
Atheism and Mental and Physical Health
Are Atheists Healthy, Happy, Moral, etc.?
Atheism and Physical, Mental, Emotional, Spiritual and Societal Health
Every liberal atheist I’ve ever seen lives in a state of perpetual rage.
Sorry. Don’t buy it. I also think the sites your links point to are very biased.
I know many atheists who are happy, raise good families, are conservative, and have more moral fiber than some of the self professed religious folk I have met over the years.
That’s why I qualified my statement with the word “liberal”. There are plenty of conservative atheists who don’t seem at all unhappy or have any of the anger issues that liberal atheists have.
This we agree on totally. :-)
Yeah but you can’t judge by that, I’m not sure if being liberal makes you bitter and angry or if you’re angry and bitter and so you are liberal? Chicken or the egg?
I suspect a lot of the anger in liberals would fade if they became Christians. For me there’s comfort in my faith that seems to have pulled my to a more conservative viewpoint.
How does it matter? If there were proof of it, would you stop believing In God? If so, how would you go about not believing in God?
“those more activists atheists who define atheism as anti-theism”
I don’t understand how these people can be “more activists” when the actual meaning of the word is a belief that there is no God (which is a contradictory statement anyway).
If you don’t hold that position then your not an Atheist irregardless of what you call yourself.
I've often wondered what an atheist ascribes 'morality' to.
“Every liberal atheist I’ve ever seen lives in a state of perpetual rage”
At least they are not “hypocrites”, atheism’s highest moral yardstick by which they “judge” all others!(sarcasm on)
Society, upbringing, “the right thing to do”, love, patriotism, a sense of what is right, do unto to others, etc. fair play, decency. Making others happy, helping others, caring for both family and their fellow man, volunteering, abiding by the law such as not stealing or cheating or lying, serving their country; I could go on all day. No deity needed.
I can only speak for myself, my opinion.
I beleive in God and that makes me happy.
Since they don’t beleive in God they are unable to
experience what I feel (God’s happiness) therefore how can they compare what they feel (sole happiness) to mine.
You can’t do a study on someone who has not experienced it!
The anger is more of a liberal problem than an atheism problem.
Your examples only further begs the question. From what does the sense or compelling desire for 'love', 'caring', 'decency', 'fair play', 'helping others' emanate?
Indeed, without a higher moral code in existence, ‘morality’ is little more than opinion.
My own experience, both in real life as well as online, inclines me to agree absolutely with that one, and I would also enthusiastically add agnostics to the mix.
And as you and cripplecreek have already established, the operative variable really does seems to be their tendency to profess ideological 'conservativism' in determining how happy & well-adjusted they are.
So then the question gets back to the chicken v. egg conundrum: are conservatives more happy & emotionally well-adjusted because they're conservative? Or are they conservative because they're more happy & psychologically better grounded?
I will say this, although I'm sure we can all cite some rather conspicuous exceptions to the rule: per capita, conservatives certainly have far better senses of humor in my experience, no matter what their religious &/or spiritual beliefs may happen to be & that much is irrefutable IMO.
Sounds like a lot of freepers too.
But it is possible to have a "higher moral code" which is not based on belief in any divinity yet is still not just a personal opinion. Their adherence to the idea of 'doing unto others as they would have done unto themselves' is just derived from the utilitarian imperative, is all. Many atheists & agnostics simply substitute "God compels me to be good" with "The greater good & my own self-interest compels me to be good." They say:" I will aspire to the higher ideals of being ethical & honest & charitable & moral & teach my kids to live similarly because that promotes a better, safer & more prosperous & beneficial world for me & the ones I love."
Now I will say that non-believers who believe in the utilitarian 'commandment' to behave themselves for the greater good also really only have the luxury of subscribing to that philosophy because they're living for all practical purposes in a world where most of their fellow citizens have learned to live the same way through divinity-based morality. They should try going to a country where judeo-christian principles have never taken root at all some time & see how their pragmatically-inspired, secular philosphically-based moral idealism holds up in practical reality there.
I'm neither atheist nor protestant,yet as a cradle RC I certainly appreciate that my ability to enjoy the benefits of living in the most propserous, productive & stable society the world has ever known while still retaining a good deal of individual liberty is due in no small part to the Calvinist Christian principles of thrift, hard work, self-sacrifice & deferred gratification upon which this country was founded & to some extent still thrives, even if increasingly in only an atavistic way.
I'm only too painfully aware, for example, that I'd never have been able to enjoy the benefits of the relative order, safety & prosperity and personal freedom which emanate from the protestant-based civil ethic here in a predominately RC country. Spain? Italy? Even France? I love them all very very dearly, but HA!
And in a society where no respect for divine power has ever held sway at all? Fugeddaboutit completely! We'd be too busy trying to survive to ever have the luxury of imagining a library with books written by any one like J. Stuart Mill let alone having the luxury of adopting them as our secular philosphical ideal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.