Does Morality come from God? There are many in this country and around the world who would say yes, that morality is indeed derived from some divine being or creator, endowed to man and man alone as a testament not only to his conspicuous place among all forms of life but as confirmation of his creator as well. However is it also possible, if not entirely likely, that morality is the product of the human mind; fallible, inconsistent and-most telling of all-subject to change? I believe so. And I would argue that history gives us many reasons to question the idea that morality is a divine creation.
The problem with the theory of morality being divinely seems to be obvious: If morality were indeed the product of a divine mandate or revelation implanted into human beings by a sentient creator, then morality would be the same across the board regardless of culture, area, and most importantly the time in which people lived. That has never been the case. Morality has changed drastically throughout the ages, leading us sometimes into darkness, sometimes into light, as we are at the moment. That is to say that I believe we live (in America) in a much more moral time now than at just about any other.
What?!
But that flies in the face of what we are told by our more conservative and religious leaders! We are told that the fabric of this country is fraying and coming undone due to our immorality: Young people living together before marriage; sex and violence in our films and television; our growing agnosticism and/or atheism. How could we possibly be living in a time of high morals?
Well, consider that 100 years ago black people were being lynched across the country for crimes often not committed, without most people even blinking an eye. Women were not allowed to vote for the president of the country in which they are citizens. Children worked long and harsh hours underground in the coal mines of Kentucky and Virgina. It also goes without saying that we were much more reverent of our religious tenets at this time.
Now lets go back 200 years. Black people were enslaved. Enslaved. Not just enslaved but treated as property, as cattle. They were not allowed to marry, or have "official" families. They could be taken from their children and vice-versa on the whim of a business transaction. They were bred like animals at "stud houses" in order to produce the strongest workers from well bred parents. Oh, and almost the entire nation was okay with this, many even believe that it was morally correct. At this time (which would be 1810) the idea of abolition was still extremely marginal, and the first abolitionists were often considered nut-cases. (See John Brown).
Now lets go back 300 years. It was completely moral, and in fact the duty of any moral person, to report young women suspected of performing witchcraft. It was even more moral to arrest that person, deny them due process, convict them of a crime that doesn't even exist--I'm sorry but I just don't believe that teenage goths with access to herbal extracts are in league with the devil--and then burn them alive--in front of a live studio audience, children included. At this time we were very, very, religious.
1000 years ago, is was perfectly moral for Viking raiders (who, in a twist of moral irony, were one of the first groups to advance women's rights--within their own group, of course) to raid, rape and kill scores of men, women and children indiscriminately. 2000 years ago (and still today in some places) is was a moral precept to stone female adulterers and homosexuals to death!!! Do you see where I'm going with this? If not read the book of Leviticus and see how many of those rules you would be willing to abide by today.
You see, the morals of our ancestors are not the morals we carry today, and thank Zeus for that! If they were, the same politicians who feel we should live by a biblical or religious standard would be swinging from trees or buried up to their necks with rocks thrown at them. See, today, we know that adultery is immoral. But we also recognize that murdering adulterers is a touch worse than the original offence. We also (most of us, anyway) realize that witchcraft is about as real as psychics and rain dances, and that burning young women alive is about the height of evil and immorality. Why? Because we live in a society of evolving morals, in which bad, outdated ideas such as stoning, burning and homicide are replaced by better, albeit contested, ideas such as alimony, derision and imprisonment.
But what about the claim that without a religious, divine or supernaturally deigned set of moral precepts then people would go guano loco?
Imagine--and this is simply a thought experiment to illustrate a point: The existence of the Hebrew god ( I say that because we often tend to forget that there have been many, many, gods since the dawn of humankind) is proven without a doubt to be incorrect and non-existent and that the bible was just a book written by regular people. Would your sweet, loving Baptist grandmother simply throw down the gauntlet and start capping fools? I mean why not? There's no supernatural punishment waiting for her at the other end.
I think not.
Or does it seem more likely that grandma, being the product of a family that nurtures and cares for it members, will continue to be that Werther's-candy-droppin' sweet woman you grew up with? I hope we all know the answer to that question.
Note: the point of this article is not to suggest that religion is evil or that we should all be atheist or some nonsense like that, but rather to question what we are told about our very nature, where is derives from, and what we should take as instruction to live better. For any group of people, the deciding factor for moral standards had always been the group itself, for better or worse. As we expand our awareness of each other drastically in this age of information, we are better able to influence each other's morals for the better, rather than simply prescribing to the lowest common denominator.
