This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Religious people do have a clearer moral code than secularists

Thanks to Lieutenant Hiro for the link.
A number of people have commented on this issue here

It’s come to this. The secularists have got me sticking up for Cherie Blair. Those barrels of laughs, the British Humanist Association and National Secular Society, have complained, apparently with straight faces, that she has discriminated against non-religious people by taking a convicted man’s religious observance into account when suspending his sentence for a violent crime.

Whatever next?

National Secular Society: “Bears discriminate against moorland by only defecating in woods.”

British Humanist Society: “Vatican treats atheists unfairly by appointing Catholic Pope – yet again.”

At a huge risk of stating the bleedin’ obvious, Cherie Booth QC, as we must call her when she’s not trading on her married name, wasn’t saying that religious people are morally superior to others. She was saying that, as a religious man, he should know better.

Even Booth, who isn’t herself blessed with an unerring sense of right and wrong, will know that there are bad religious people and good non-religious people.
Continue reading

Atheists are more annoying than believers

I’m transfixed, in a mind-melty sort of way, by the allegation that Cherie Booth — in her lofty judge capacity, rather than her slightly-chippy-former- PM’s-wife capacity — gave a more lenient sentence to a man convicted of assault because he was religious. Shamso Miah was on his way home from his mosque when he joined the queue at a cash dispenser. After a disagreement about who was in front of whom, he punched somebody else in the face, breaking his jaw. Judge Cherie, the story goes, suspended his sentence, on the basis that he was a religious man, and already beating himself up about it. Albeit not literally. Presumably.

Now the National Secular Society has complained to the Judicial Complaints Office that this sort of thing is unfair to atheists, on the basis that, if Miah had been one, he’d have been off to chokey. It’s got everything, this story. Creepy religious Blairs? Check. Out-of-touch judges? Check. A slightly scary Muslim? Check. They’re probably knocking out a BBC Four docudrama about it as I type. But the nub of the matter, I think, is the old chestnut about the bearing, if any, that religious belief should have on abstract morality.
Continue reading



It's What Moral Philosophers Do

Richard Dawkins - Comments

It's What Moral Philosophers Do

Moral Clarity and Richard Dawkins

Carson - Reasons for God 264 Comments

What kind of meta-ethical foundation has Dawkins provided for his ‘moral home’?

The Moral Necessity of a Godless...

Tauriq Moosa - big think 78 Comments

The Moral Necessity of a Godless Existence

UPDATED: Why I want all our children to...

Richard Dawkins - The Observer 197 Comments

Whatever else the Bible might be – and it really is a great work of literature – it is not a moral book and young people need to learn that important fact because they are very frequently told the opposite.

Who matters (or should) when scientists...

Janet D. Stemwedel - Scientific... 7 Comments

Who matters (or should) when scientists engage in ethical decision-making?

Bioethicist Richard Dawkins: Morality,...

Sean DeButts - BellevuePatch 36 Comments

Bioethicist Richard Dawkins: Morality, Society Can Be "Intelligently Designed"





Comment RSS Feed

Please sign in or register to comment