Atheism And Morality

Atheists are doubling down on their insistence that they are moral and that the rest of the world needs to accept that. The non-Atheist world is beyond skeptical, because the cry of "we are too Good" contains a word without meaning in the relativist utopia of Atheism. What do they mean, they are good? Anyone with education in such things knows that Nietzsche absolutely did away with Good and Evil, in his philosophical work on the subject, "Beyond Good and Evil". And Dawkins cannot judge anything Hitler did, because evil does not exist for Dawkins - except for things Dawkins hates.

So if there is no Good or Evil, how is it that Atheists can demand that they be seen as "good"? There are obvious and not obvious reasons for that. Let's take it from the bottom, up.

Atheism rejects any moral authority which is absolute or binding. It can't help doing so, because of evolution which "scientifically" doctrinally commits the Atheist to both Philosophical Materialism and to the animalism of humans. There obviously is no morality contained in either Philosophical Materialism, or in the human as animal. The claim that morality evolved is based on no material evidence whatsoever, and therefore is not empirical nor is it objective knowledge under the constraint of Materialism. So without any exterior source of morality, Atheists have only themselves as the source.

Atheists therefore claim that it is their special empathy which gives them the ability to morally judge situations on an individual basis. There being no set principles for judging any situation, the Atheist claims that empathy leads to justice and righteous decisions. But what then are "justice" and what is "Right" vs. "Wrong"? They reduce straight to merely whatever the Atheist claims that his empathy tells him they are, for a given situation.

The Atheist has done two things here. He has eliminated any ethical consideration from anyone but himself, thereby establishing himself as the ultimate moral authority, i.e., an ethical elite. And he has seized control - he thinks - of the actions and lives of others who are inferior to himself because they adhere to contrary absolute ethics and give the moral authority to a fictional source; so the Atheist considers himself the only and final moral arbiter. Justice and Right are exactly what the Atheist says they are and no more than that.

Thus an Atheist cannot be other than Good - in his own estimation. It is tautological, defined to be that way.

By eliminating the standards of behavior and instituting behaviors which are judged by Atheists and no one else, the Atheists have produced "moral" control for themselves of situations and of other people. They have removed the walls of civility and decency, and replaced them with the anarchy of behaviors which only Atheists can morally judge. And they judge differentially, based on class distinctions. If Class R does behavior L, it is OK; But if Class G does behavior L, it is Evil. That's how situational ethics works in real life.

Civilization is not a natural state. It is formed around necessary and consistent rules of civilized behavior. Situational moral judgment by elitists removes any possibility of knowing in advance whether your behaviors are "moral" under the Atheist's personal situational moral authority. Because the common man cannot know in advance whether the Atheists will approve or disapprove of his behavior, what, then, is the use of restricting one's behavior in advance? Why not moral anarchy, just like the Atheists propose for themselves?

In fact, under the modern morality of "tolerance and equality", it is arguable that there is no aberrational behavior at all. All behaviors are "equal" and must be "tolerated". But that is not how Atheist empathy works. In actual reality Atheists and leftists in general will not tolerate any behavior which might invalidate their authority, be it political authority or moral authority. So they are quite totalitarian in policing the behaviors of other people, while tolerating all behaviors of their own fully entitled class.

So it boils down to "tolerance" for any behavior of the correct class regardless of its nature and consequences; "equality" of outcome for my class by redistribution of their wealth and stuff; strict policing of the Oppressors and punitive retaliation if they upset me in any manner. To upset an Atheist is intolerant and therefore immoral under the Atheist dichotomous rules.

Atheist "morality" is actually a force of moral entropy, a degradation of civilization while promising utopia on earth, as the Messiahs promise to their Victim class which they perpetuate in actual suppression.