Crosswords2 mins ago
Moral decline
89 Answers
First of all, apologies if this is not quite in the right category. I've been "lurking" on this site for quite some time now and find the argument/discussion between theist and atheist interesting and often quite amusing. I am a confirmed atheist, having walked out of C of E confirmation classes some fifty years ago, so I align myself with the "usual suspects" (I will admit to have a sneaking respect for some contributors who "appear" to have such an unshakeable faith in a collection of mistranslated fairy stories!).
My problem is that I am becoming increasingly concerned about the moral decline in our society and find myself wishing the established church would accept it's role and take more of a moral stand to help reverse some of the outrageous imbalance that just seems to be getting worse. This makes me feel a bit of a hypocrite, but in the absence of any other acceptable role models where else should we be looking? Probably not politicians!!
My problem is that I am becoming increasingly concerned about the moral decline in our society and find myself wishing the established church would accept it's role and take more of a moral stand to help reverse some of the outrageous imbalance that just seems to be getting worse. This makes me feel a bit of a hypocrite, but in the absence of any other acceptable role models where else should we be looking? Probably not politicians!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by jason.p. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Why don't we campaign for morals/ethics/philosophy to be taught in schools in place of religion ? Let's stop teaching that there have to be sticks and carrots ( the blackmail of hell and heaven) Rather let us teach that people can decide for themselves that good behaviour is desirable just because it is good behaviour, and that acting honourably is best done for its own sake, not from brain-washing or indoctrination.
Boxtops. Like I said you don't have to be a practicing Christian to hold "christian" beliefs. I like to think I hold many such beliefs, but by no stretch of the imagination would you call me a christian.
LG. It was you that said previous generations had complained about a moral decline not me. I just said it was my observation of the current situation. As for defining a moral "gold standard" I'm not sure what you mean. Could you define it? What I can see are changes for the worse which appear to me to be accelerating , which collectively, as I see it, add up to a moral decline. These include amongst others a lack of respect for authority in the home at school and for the law. All the role models for the younger generation (who are the future society) seem to be the highly paid sportsmen, x-factor stars etc. so their aspirations are to get rich as quick as possible by any means. The other disturbing factor is the growing divide between the haves and have-nots which if not addressed could well lead to social unrest. That's as close to a definition that I can give.
What can they do? For a start make their voices heard at every opportunity and let the "have nots" feel they have a voice too. They could make their influence felt in local and national politics (as can we all). Change is not going to happen overnight, I realise that, but we have to make an effort to get things moving in a different direction and I still see the church as having a role to play.
Sandy. Am I David Camoron? Hardly. I see him and his ilk as part of the problem not the solution.
LG. It was you that said previous generations had complained about a moral decline not me. I just said it was my observation of the current situation. As for defining a moral "gold standard" I'm not sure what you mean. Could you define it? What I can see are changes for the worse which appear to me to be accelerating , which collectively, as I see it, add up to a moral decline. These include amongst others a lack of respect for authority in the home at school and for the law. All the role models for the younger generation (who are the future society) seem to be the highly paid sportsmen, x-factor stars etc. so their aspirations are to get rich as quick as possible by any means. The other disturbing factor is the growing divide between the haves and have-nots which if not addressed could well lead to social unrest. That's as close to a definition that I can give.
What can they do? For a start make their voices heard at every opportunity and let the "have nots" feel they have a voice too. They could make their influence felt in local and national politics (as can we all). Change is not going to happen overnight, I realise that, but we have to make an effort to get things moving in a different direction and I still see the church as having a role to play.
Sandy. Am I David Camoron? Hardly. I see him and his ilk as part of the problem not the solution.
@jason - It is your original post, jason - not mine - it is your observation that there is a moral decline, one greater or more different to that observed by previous generations - not mine.Morality is, and always has been, a relative value, not an absolute from which we deviate.I think your post is a rather too sweeping a generalisation which demonises a complete society - not an accurate observation.
At the risk of repetition - every generation has complained about exactly the same thing, but none of these observers can offer a kind of gold standard of a moral code that should be adhered to - just vague observations that things are worse now than they were previously.
You are a self- professed atheist - why then do you continue to offer religion as some sort of arbiter of morality? Given the state of organised religion in this country, given the lack of attendance at churches, what are you proposing that they do over and above what they are already doing?Why do you think that they would offer any sort of credible example?
Atalanta has the right of it, i think. Should the churches wish to aid in this, I guess that is fine, but they bring the baggage of their religious allegiance with them - and that divisiveness is something to be discouraged, in my opinion.
At the risk of repetition - every generation has complained about exactly the same thing, but none of these observers can offer a kind of gold standard of a moral code that should be adhered to - just vague observations that things are worse now than they were previously.
You are a self- professed atheist - why then do you continue to offer religion as some sort of arbiter of morality? Given the state of organised religion in this country, given the lack of attendance at churches, what are you proposing that they do over and above what they are already doing?Why do you think that they would offer any sort of credible example?
Atalanta has the right of it, i think. Should the churches wish to aid in this, I guess that is fine, but they bring the baggage of their religious allegiance with them - and that divisiveness is something to be discouraged, in my opinion.
I agree with you there has been a moral decline .One of the biggest things
missing in society today is 'respect'. Good manners is another thing missing
also. I'm a christian and don't think myself any better than someone who has
a different belief or no belief at all. Listening to one another is important,you
might not hold with their views, but if we all spoke and thought the same,
then we would be mere robots. Our role models should be our parents, but
they are human with their failings. We should accept that however old we are
there are still precious lessons to learn. A lot of the banter on here seems to
fight insult with insult [I've even been guilty of that myself]. Being a Christian
dosen't make me perfect.Sometimes if you cant think of anything nice to say,
perhaps you should hold your tongue. There have been many times in my life
when I wish I'd done just that. Have to go now, Mr. cupid is calling.xx
missing in society today is 'respect'. Good manners is another thing missing
also. I'm a christian and don't think myself any better than someone who has
a different belief or no belief at all. Listening to one another is important,you
might not hold with their views, but if we all spoke and thought the same,
then we would be mere robots. Our role models should be our parents, but
they are human with their failings. We should accept that however old we are
there are still precious lessons to learn. A lot of the banter on here seems to
fight insult with insult [I've even been guilty of that myself]. Being a Christian
dosen't make me perfect.Sometimes if you cant think of anything nice to say,
perhaps you should hold your tongue. There have been many times in my life
when I wish I'd done just that. Have to go now, Mr. cupid is calling.xx
I don't think it's the church's job; attendance is purely voluntary. Morality isn't specifically religious.
But morality doesn't decline forever; it swings back and forth. The puritanism of Cromwell's rule was replaced by the libertinism of Charles II's restoration. Regency degeneracy was followed by Victorian primness.
What this implies is that our binge-drinking children will have second thoughts about their own kids growing up as their parents did, and develop a more restrictive society. I don't know if it will happen; but in essence, it's happened before.
But morality doesn't decline forever; it swings back and forth. The puritanism of Cromwell's rule was replaced by the libertinism of Charles II's restoration. Regency degeneracy was followed by Victorian primness.
What this implies is that our binge-drinking children will have second thoughts about their own kids growing up as their parents did, and develop a more restrictive society. I don't know if it will happen; but in essence, it's happened before.
"I must admit to being somewhat confused and surprised by some of the negative responses. Perhaps as Boo says "I'm another person" and not one of regulars. As to "offensive"???? strange post???? "
Well, you damn the Christian Church as peddlers of and believers in fairy stories, which is, of course, not the first time anyone has done that. And you call on the Church to make a "moral stand" - again, not the first time ...
However, it does sound mighty odd combining the two more or less in one breath and even you yourself admit it's a somewhat hypocritical stance.
So are you surprised?
Peope have doubtless been worried about the "moral decline in our society" since time immemorial. But how can you possibly think the Church has any role at all when you plainly have no time for it?
Well, you damn the Christian Church as peddlers of and believers in fairy stories, which is, of course, not the first time anyone has done that. And you call on the Church to make a "moral stand" - again, not the first time ...
However, it does sound mighty odd combining the two more or less in one breath and even you yourself admit it's a somewhat hypocritical stance.
So are you surprised?
Peope have doubtless been worried about the "moral decline in our society" since time immemorial. But how can you possibly think the Church has any role at all when you plainly have no time for it?
He can respond to whatever he likes Whiskeyron, and I certainly do not call the tune, nor would I want to. I don't know if you ever venture into the 'Religion and Spirituality' section, but if you do you will see scores of posts by Elderman- all of them simply copy and pasted religious rhetoric. I have all the time on the world for anyone who posts questions or answers on any topic if they have formulated a response, but this person does not, he merely posts a piece of copy and pasted scripture ( usually JW based) and does not even attempt to address any questions put to him other than to do his best to insult anyone who disagrees with him.
To now he has confined himself to that (I think)- if he decides to start his rhetoric on other threads then, in my opinion ( to which I believe I too am entitled) it will be unfortunate. I do not call the tune here, nor would I wish to as I enjoy the diversity of debate, but have used this site for about 7 years, so feel that I am as entitled to voice the fact that I don't welcome some things to do with the site as you are to persistantly moan about anything you don't like, or indeed to comment on what I choose to write.
Kind Regards, Padraig.
To now he has confined himself to that (I think)- if he decides to start his rhetoric on other threads then, in my opinion ( to which I believe I too am entitled) it will be unfortunate. I do not call the tune here, nor would I wish to as I enjoy the diversity of debate, but have used this site for about 7 years, so feel that I am as entitled to voice the fact that I don't welcome some things to do with the site as you are to persistantly moan about anything you don't like, or indeed to comment on what I choose to write.
Kind Regards, Padraig.
I haven't had time to read all the posts, but when you speak of the church stepping in to halt the 'moral decline' of people in this country, that worries me. What are we talking about here? The concept of 'sin', or a lack of respect for oneself and for others? The two do not correlate. 'Sin' is loosely defined as 'deliberate disobedience of the will of God', but depending upon your personal belief, a lack of respect for oneself and for others, does not necessarily equate to sin. Education is the answer - and that must come from families and from unbiased professionals - not from an establishment with a pre-conceived religious agenda.
I find it interesting that you used the adjective "Christian" to describe your non-religious beliefs/standards. I think you'd find that many "be good to your fellow man, do as you would be done by" tenets hold good in a number of religions, and certainly people who don't believe in anything can still be inherently good. It's morality, respect for others, and decency which should be instilled in people, not the ethics appertaining to any particular religion. I wouldn't bring the church or mosque or synagogue into this conversation - rather that people should treat each other decently and have personal standards of behaviour, but not enforced by any religious bodies.
If you are an atheist, there is no God OK?, why are you wanting the Church of God to stand up and make and effort against the moral decline jason.p? Why don't you atheists, who know all but do nowt, do something about the moral decline. Or just hoping that maybe the people who have faith in God and his teachings will bring about the reforms that are sadly lacking in our young people of today - No stricture in life, no purpose or faith in anything or anyone but themselves and what can be bought or stolen. Strange, David Cameron is reported to have said just the same thing in todays papers about the useless Archbish of C.
With regards to loss of respect it is easy to point to certain examples of it. On the other hand there are many people who are highly respectful. It just doesn't suit those who argue moral decline to acknowledge them.
In the past there has been far less genuine respect than would appear. The classical notion of "respect your elders" is a phurphy. It was more a case of show respect or have the carp beaten out of you. The lack of respect for youth was evident and causing an undercurrent of reaction.
The removal of the right to beat children has let that undercurrent reach the surface where it is now pointed to by the proponents of "moral decline". Only the visibility has changed.
Meanwhile many modern people have brought up their families with a notion of mutual respect. We didn't demand respect from our children while treating them as subordinates. We showed them respect and got genuine respect in return.
Left to the church this major advance would be turned on it head with philosophies of "spare the rod and soil the child". Indeed the Bible teaches that children should be stoned to death for disrespecting their parents.
The Bible teachs that women should be subordinate to all men, especially their father's and husbands. Like so much of its outdated philosophy the Bible teaches primitive, artificial notions of respect.
Religion is conservatiove and reactionary. Religion is not a fountain of morality but actually inhibits advance.
In the past there has been far less genuine respect than would appear. The classical notion of "respect your elders" is a phurphy. It was more a case of show respect or have the carp beaten out of you. The lack of respect for youth was evident and causing an undercurrent of reaction.
The removal of the right to beat children has let that undercurrent reach the surface where it is now pointed to by the proponents of "moral decline". Only the visibility has changed.
Meanwhile many modern people have brought up their families with a notion of mutual respect. We didn't demand respect from our children while treating them as subordinates. We showed them respect and got genuine respect in return.
Left to the church this major advance would be turned on it head with philosophies of "spare the rod and soil the child". Indeed the Bible teaches that children should be stoned to death for disrespecting their parents.
The Bible teachs that women should be subordinate to all men, especially their father's and husbands. Like so much of its outdated philosophy the Bible teaches primitive, artificial notions of respect.
Religion is conservatiove and reactionary. Religion is not a fountain of morality but actually inhibits advance.
