Aron Ra on The moral argument

Aron Ra treats the moral argument with the same directness he brings to creationism. The claim that without God there can be no objective morality is, in his view, both philosophically unfounded and empirically refuted. Secular societies consistently outperform religious ones on measures of social health — crime rates, educational attainment, life expectancy, gender equality — which suggests that religion is not necessary for moral behaviour and may actually impede it.

Ra argues that morality is a natural phenomenon, arising from empathy, social cooperation, and the evolved capacity for reciprocity. These traits are observable in other social species and do not require supernatural grounding. The moral argument confuses the question of where morality comes from (evolution and culture) with the question of whether God exists (a separate issue entirely).

He is particularly critical of the biblical moral framework, arguing that any moral system that endorses slavery, genocide, and the subjugation of women is not a system worth defending. If we must use our own moral judgment to sort the good parts of the Bible from the bad parts, then our moral judgment is prior to — and more reliable than — scripture.