is it possible for people to follow a proper moral code without religion or will it always lead to moral relativism and the decay of civilised society?
moral relativism is not the opposite of moral realism. moral realism is not necessary for society to exist. moral code exists already without religion in animistic societies and in first world secular societies. everything you're implying is fucking wrong.
>>2038117
religion is moral relativist
even if the entire country had the same religion some fucknugget would just make up a different sect and say your morality is wrong (and that god hates you).
>>2038133
>some fucknugget would just make up a different sect and say your morality is wrong
and get stoned to death for promoting heresy.
>>2038145
litterally isis
>>2038184
>thinking only islam killed heretics
>>2038145
>tfw the fucknugget gets too much of a following then cut you, smash your children, and rip your wife open
their sect accepted that part of the religion
ITT: atheists doing mental gymnastics
The reality is that atheism based on naturalist philosophy and darwinism is ultimately a nihilist, self-defeating, suicidal ideology.
>>2038199
forgot the link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_burned_as_heretics
>>2038117
who cares lmao
Sure. Your values are just strictly subjective.
There's a relative shortage of philosophers that truly attempt to grapple with the baselessness of atheist morality. Stirner, Nietzsche, Camus, and Marx (as well as the non-religious existentialists) are the ones off the top of my head.
In an atheistic worldview, values ultimately wind up arbitrary, but this is also true in a religious system because "God's values" are just God's own subjective values.
Yes but in general only more intelligent and educated people.
>>2038130
>moral code exists already without religion in animistic societies
Yes let's be more like those mud eating savages, look how great they are
>and in first world secular societies
The moral code of first world secular societies is the 10 Commandments