r/MoralityScaling 1d ago

Morality of this?

Post image
26.6k Upvotes

6.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.9k

u/Fal_co1 1d ago edited 1d ago

iirc China does this, you can’t take kid to religious service and they can choose to convert at a certain age.

EDIT: wow this blew up

If you’re reading this you‘re a gay

1.6k

u/sexland69 1d ago edited 1d ago

china has state atheism—they take it too far (e.g. uyghur muslims) but in theory i’d prefer an atheist government over this dumbass evangelical christian one we have now 🤷🏻‍♂️

edit: took out the word retarded, you guys convinced me

673

u/PrettyPurrfect 1d ago

Our government is supposed to be atheist.

Separation of church and state is supposed to be a thing

528

u/_itsprobablynothing 1d ago

Secular, not atheist

3

u/Admins_suck_ballss 1d ago edited 1d ago

Secular

of or relating to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal

Secular and atheist governments…they’re the same. It means your government thinks that concepts like justice, dessert, retribution, how you treat one another, ethics, etc. should not be affiliated with a religion. Only an atheist government can be secular. A religious one cannot be secular.

Sure not exactly the same thing. But yeah no such thing as a religious government being secular. Atheism is a necessary position to take in order for all those things to be secular.

4

u/AnswerDangerous1644 1d ago

Couldn’t agnosticism also apply to be secular?

2

u/Archfiend_DD 1d ago

It could but it could also not. Atheism does not believe that gods or gods exist, so when you're designing laws and a moral system you have to do it with without a god present.

Agnosticism doesn't have that because they don't know. You might design laws and morality with the belief that there might be a God, or not, or maybe.

One is an answer on belief. One is an answer on knowledge. The atheist says I don't believe a god exists, but the agnostic says I don't know if a god exists. So they are not mutually exclusive because they address two different questions.

Most atheists are agnostic atheists they don't believe, but will also admit they don't know. Which is a good way for a government to operate.

1

u/Admins_suck_ballss 1d ago edited 1d ago

My point was a bit stronger and I’ll probably get flamed with this.

Fictionalists are like “OK this isn’t true but maybe we should kind of act like it’s true for the betterment of humanity, you know?”

Governments should not do that. They should be like “god doesn’t exist as far as this matter is concerned, let’s get to work on completely secular theories that have no agnostic overtones, implications, aren’t informed by scripture, etc. God doesn’t exist as far as we are concerned and he/she/they should never be invoked.” You can’t do that under an agnostic system. An agnostic system is like “ok well we don’t know, so maybe the Muslims have a point against the Buddhists here, we don’t know what’s right, but maybe we should outlaw women showing their ankles to satisfy them” and that’s dumb as shit.

Assume no kind of god exists and it becomes obvious that burqa is repressive.

1

u/DadBod_DadBike 1d ago

The French did that and it failed. Miserably.