The religious sentiment that one cannot be "good without God" is wrong. Morality is more complicated than that. One can be good without God, good with God, bad without God, or bad with God. We have many motivations and influences; they are hard to pinpoint. Moreover, we are all born with a basic sense of morality. We do not need God to be moral.

But what of the argument that religious belief generally has a bad influence on our public morality, not better? The question becomes, can you be "good with God"?

I have asked dumb questions before, which qualifies me to say the following.

This is a dumb question.

Is the atheist's answer, "you can be good with God, but you'd be even better without"?

it probably depends on the atheist.

If an atheist thinks nonbelief is better, than he must admit it is better to be a nonbeliever.

why is nonbelief "better"?

It's just as dumb to write off Christian "good" based on Christian atrocity as it is to do it to atheists following, say, demonic authority.

Argue away that Christianity sews evil seeds in society, which is naturally endemic of every religion. With a billion followers the percentages are against you. But to postulate that it might not be possible to create "good with God" is ludicrous.

Is the atheist's answer, "you can be good with God, but you'd be even better without"?

In this line of thinking, it would have to be.

Well that is a different question. And I'm not sure I want to answer right now.

well, from the Catholic perspective, we're all God because his love is our love. In a way we are always good with God, but that doesn't mean he is never disappointed with our actions

It's like a good nurturing parent.

"But Randy, what is a good nurturing parent?"

I don't know, watch Full House

I don't follow. I am not saying it's not possible. Just that people would generally be better without God.

Maybe this is just a phrasing thing, but... lolwut

The question "can you be good with God" stipulates that there is an extreme toward which the answer is, "no." I am saying that such an extreme is a radical and ill-informed leap, no matter who's making the assertion.

If there are atheists that share in that belief then I am inclined to disregard them.

if someone believes it makes a person a better person to not believe, then i guess they would believe someone's a better person if they don't believe. if i think being able to sit through two girls one cup makes a person morally superior, then i guess they are for me.

every time we perform an unselfish act of love, that is the manifestation of God, or the words and teachings of Jesus.

That is why they call it the "miracle of goodness"

Ok that makes sense. I thought you were pulling some transubstantiation shit with homeless people andiwuzlike

Aha. I am not sure I would call the favor extreme.

By nature it has to be. 'No' and 'Yes' are black and white terms as we use them in this context, are they not?

how do you come to that conclusion?

It does seem like an unqualifiable statement... yeah.