This past Friday CNN conducted an interview with Richard Dawkins, the British biologist most widely known for his polemics against religion and on behalf of atheism. Asked “whether an absence of religion would leave us without a moral compass,” Dawkins responded: “The very idea that we get a moral compass from religion is horrible.”
This is the crux of the issue for Dawkins and other
anti-religion activists — that not only do we not need religion or God for
morality, but we would have a considerably more moral world without them. This argument is so wrong — both rationally and
empirically – that its appeal can only be explained by a) a desire to believe
it and b) an ignorance of history.
First, the rational argument. If there is no God, the labels “good” and “evil” are
merely opinions. They are substitutes for “I like it” and “I don’t like it.”
They are not objective realities.....To Read More.....
No comments:
Post a Comment