Is John Arthur Right Or Wrong

There are many reasons to make morally right decisions. John Arthur argues that while religion provides many good reasons to make morally just decisions, it is not the only reason to do the right thing, so therefore religion is not necessary for morality. His argument is valid, but it is not sound. John Arthur’s argument is unsound because the “good non-religious reasons to be moral” that he speaks of are merely feelings of guilt, which stem from the knowledge of what is right or wrong that was based off of religious beliefs. In todays society the basis for right and wrong comes from the laws that legislature sets for society to follow. These laws cover everything from murder to lying. When lawmakers first attempted to set in stone the laws …show more content…
Living in a country that was founded on the basis of Christianity, has an influence of everyone’s lives, no matter their religious affiliation. Just because a certain religion preaches that it is okay to lie, does not mean that a person that practices that religion could lie during a criminal investigation and it would not be illegal. The laws of our country are the laws, and it just happens that they lead back to Christian values. I will not deny that most people don’t follow laws because of the their linkage to religions values, religion has greatly faded into the background in todays society, but that does not change that laws started out being religiously motivated, so even without realizing it by following the laws of the country every person is slightly religiously motivated to be moral. Just because people follow laws like they are facts does not change their origins. Almost every developed country either still has or did at one time religious leaders or groups of leaders that based their decisions and laws off of their religious beliefs, and most of time their beliefs reflected those of their people. Their beliefs shaped the laws of their country and allowed religion to be an underlying motivation in majority of countries in the world. Arthur’s objections to my argument fail because they do not comprehend that every person has an underlying religious motivation, weather it is conscious or subconscious, because of the basis for the laws and morals for the country. A different personal belief system does not change how the laws came to