A recurrent theme thrust forward by many theists is that morality is unattainable without belief in God. The idea seems to pervade that thinking, that without God-restraint, fear of lost eternity, man would run seriously amok, freely plundering, murdering, and bringing general havoc upon the innocent.
Might there be some logical points to counter such thinking. Could some of those points actually indicate that believing is immoral of itself? Before the dyed-in-wool believers begin searching for enough lumber to erect a proper gallows upon which to hang this nay-sayer, hear me out please.
If we accept that belief is rooted in 'faith', and not in logical support, we have already shifted away from any sense of responsibility in the matter of God-acceptance or not. We have laid the matter at the feet of those who have instructed us in 'faith', either since childhood, or later upon some 'experience' that 'bonded' us with Deity. We have passed on adult accountability. Our system of 'belief' was likely not our own to begin with - we either inherited it from parents who were believers, or we acquired it as a result of the social environs in which we were trained to see the world. Almost universally people become believers of the 'Deity of the day', the one chosen by the culture, not by the individual. If you live in the United States for instance, you are most likely 'Christian', though ethnic diversity is changing that somewhat nowadays.
Other systems of thought come to us in similar ways. Some of those thought systems are rooted out as we age and become aware of the 'immoral' nature of them. For instance, many are reared in a family that is racist. The parents may 'hate' people of other cultures or races, often with no logical explanation, just emotionally charged ones. A fair share of those children will grow up with the precise hatreds as the parents - and they could not logically defend that emotion. Such emotion is destructive, because it is rooted in non-logical base. Some, however, grow up and take an honest look at the matter of race, and logically conclude that what they were taught was clearly unproductive, emotionally stifling, and dangerous to society at large. They make a change based on logic. They put aside 'faith' in what parents had instilled, and make sober reflection to make that change.
In much the same way, when we are emotionally sober, we can look about and sense in a reasonable, clear mind, that Deity has not shown himself to be as absolutely clear and obvious to us as we had been taught. We can admit that while science is 'imperfect', it certainly has volume of evidence in support of the idea of evolution for instance. God's signature does not appear as obvious to the clear mind, as it does to the emotional dependent.
Addicts have this emotional dependence problem. They fight the addiction successfully for a time. Then the urge to excuse the logical good choices of avoidance of the dangerous substance begins to subside. Resistance breaks down as emotional and psychological 'needs' override a clear and reasonable course. Soon a bottle or a cigarette, or a syringe, has won the battle.
Believing is far closer to addiction than the believer wishes to accept. But many parallels can be drawn. It feels good to abandon personal fear and lose that fear in the arms of God. It feels right to 'roll all your needs' into God's lap, and then to excuse God for his failure to fulfill them based on his higher understanding. It feels good to assume that all the bad in the world is a result of dark forces that oppose God, thereby excusing 'good' society, religion, and believers from any part in the shared responsibility of community, and therefore the changes needed to correct the direction of the social evolution personally. Instead we hand it over to God. Soon all will be fixed/healed/repaired in the everlasting.
The believer is unable to make any distinction between 'believing' and 'believing because my belief is backed by logical thought and reason'. In fact, most belief is emotionally driven, not logical, though sometimes seemingly logical arguments are developed to cover the emotional dependence. Like the cigarette smoker who defends his bad habit. He has no logical defense, but covers with illogical emotion. More of the 'it feels good, therefore I can excuse the chasm between feeling and logic in this case.' Once emotion is settled down again, he sees the need to take a logical good step toward health again. And he repeats the process.
The dangers of belief are what make it immoral. Deluded thinking. Impeding of scientific progress. Encouraging a vast over-simplification of the worldview of ourselves and our children.
Believing leads to no answers, no solutions, no response of a long-lasting effect to the problems that face the current hominids who dominate the planet. This is not to say that some charitable work is of not done by the believer. But it is done with the idea that the eventual 'fix', the permanent one, is in the hands of Deity not man.
This is also not to insist that believers live in a total responsibility vacuum. Nothing can be so clearly stated for any group entirely. But the very notion of 'belief' carries the notion that we are beyond a real solution - only Deity can reduce the problem to it's base issues and solve it. The believer's social responsibility becomes dependent on a supposed eventuality by a 'supposed God' that cannot be defended logically.
In this barren mind-scape, responsibility is eroded. It is a sloppy view, one that has lowered our bar to a level that puts 'belief' without evidence in a higher place than it does logically driven reality. One that makes 'believing' an elevated position over logic and rational thought. A mind so driven is not behind the solution, but part of the problem of moving mankind toward accomplishment.
Our ancestors developed blind faith to cover what they could not understand. As science has unraveled the mysteries that early man could not unravel, the need for specific or general deities to explain gravity, movement of the stars and sea, storms, earthquakes diminished. Deities were summarily shelved in favor of reason - yet some of the old superstition remains today. It is that I deem immoral, for it's harmful effects on social evolution today.
Jeff