SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Here's a discovery that could make secular parents say hallelujah: Children who grow up in non-religious homes are more generous and altruistic than children from observant families. ...
A series of experiments involving 1,170 kids from a variety of religious backgrounds found that the non-believers were more likely to share stickers with their classmates and less likely to endorse harsh punishments for people who pushed or bumped into others.
The results "contradict the common-sense and popular assumption that children from religious households are more altruistic and kind toward others," according to a study published this week in the journal Current Biology.
Worldwide, about 5.8 billion people consider themselves religious, and religion is a primary way for cultures to express their ideas about proper moral behavior — especially behavior that involves self-sacrifice for the sake of others.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday November 08 2015, @02:04PM
Unacceptable in modern society, not disagreed with by the grand majority of society.
I said "I hold many beliefs that a grand majority of society does not share" and you replied to it as if you disagreed with that, so I thought you were speaking of mere disagreement.
What do you mean by "unacceptable"? Illegal? I don't know of any beliefs that are outright illegal to have, at least not in many first world countries. So I don't know what you're talking about.
I do not see how, and you've not presented much of an argument why I would be wrong. If you live in a society, you need to act according to its morals (codified in law).
Well, you didn't really present any reason for me to believe that they can't be functioning members of society.
And laws are different from morality. Just because something is illegal that doesn't mean a majority of society finds it wrong. It could just be that a select few plutocrats pushed a lot of laws through while the public was being entertained by bread and circuses and distracted by hot topics like immigration. Don't confuse morality with law, even if you're talking about society. If you do, you don't have a very useful definition of morality from my standpoint.
Those who do not follow these laws (morals) on a structural basis are removed from society.
You seem to assume that the laws are perfectly enforced or even well enforced. That is not often not the case. So even someone who has beliefs that are "unacceptable" to society can be a functioning member of society, even if it's just because they hide what they believe.
Still need to know what "unacceptable" means exactly, however. Since the topic is about beliefs, it doesn't make much sense to me.