People who have no religion know right from wrong just as well as regular worshippers, according to the study.
I wish I had a dollar for every study that has been published announcing some wack-a-doodle idea as “scientific.”
I don’t doubt atheists, or even the non-Christians religious, are moral and know right from wrong. That is not under dispute. The Bible says quite plainly that all men act according to God’s law instinctively (Romans 1-2). That’s because all men everywhere are created in God’s image. I expect atheists whose parents raised them right by making them go to church to act according to moral values.
What is in dispute, however, is how the atheist justifies his morals. He lives according to a worldview that interprets everything along naturalistic and material terms. Moral standards, however, are not material. So where did the rules of morality come from if we only live in a strictly naturalistic and material universe? Oh yes, I know some philosophizing atheists attempt to explain the presence of morals as being social constructs we had to develop as humans evolved in order to survive and keep the species going. But really, is raping a child a wrong thing only now in our modern culture or has it always been a wrong thing even when we were allegedly “ape men”?
Think of “Ardi.” Would raping a child be wrong for “Ardi?” If such an atrocity wasn’t wrong when “Ardi” was around, what makes it wrong now in 2010? Because we all just naturally came to that conclusion? Let’s say, according to evolutionary theory, the human race is around for another 12,000 years. In the year 4578, if the then society no longer prosecuted rapists, would raping children still be wrong? It is these “why” questions these studies need to explore, not whether or not atheists know right from wrong. Atheists may know it, but why do they; and according to the philosophy of their chosen worldview, why should we care?