October 12, 2025 • 13 mins
If morality comes from God, why do moral progress and religious doctrine so often collide? Mike Smithgall breaks down the myth that we need divine authority to be good.
This episode examines empathy’s evolutionary roots, the failures of fear-based morality, and the evidence that secular societies thrive without divine command. It’s a reasoned and candid look at what truly drives human ethics.
Visit www.Atheistville.com for more shows and resources.
Q: How do you explain moral instincts in people who’ve never been exposed to religious teachings?
Visit us at www.Atheistville.com for more content from Mike Smithgall and the Atheistville team
📺 Subscribe on YouTube: youtube.com/@atheistville
💬 Want to be a guest or submit a question? Drop us a note at CONTACT
Check us out at: https://atheistville.buzzsprout.com
🔥 New episodes weekly from Atheistville — Mike Drop with Mike Smithgall, Ask an Atheist, and The Unholy Roundtable
© 2025 Atheistville Media
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:00):
Thanks for tuning in.
I'm Mike Smithgall, theunelected mayor of Atheistville,
and this is today's Mic Drop.
A while back, I got a commentthat perfectly captures one of
the most persistent myths aboutatheism.
A member of the community that Iwill call hope and I had a
lovely and friendly exchange,but during the discussion about
(00:22):
morals, they said this the issueis still sin.
How can you want a godlesssociety and yet you still want
to blame God for the issues?
If God were eradicated fromsociety tomorrow, do you
genuinely believe that pure,innocent babies would be born
into a safer world?
(00:42):
Now I responded, but theirquestion deserves a deeper dive
because it touches on somethingfundamental, the relationship
between morality and the conceptof sin.
Today I want to dismantle theidea that our moral compass and
the very definition of goodcomes from God or scripture.
The evidence from biology toanthropology to our own moral
(01:06):
progress tells us a verydifferent story.
Religion didn't invent morality,it hijacked it.
Now let's start our argumentwith what I call the scandal
test.
Let's start with Hope's corepremise that without God,
children wouldn't be safe.
But here's the uncomfortabletruth.
Children haven't beenparticularly safe with God
(01:27):
either.
The Catholic Church has faceddecades of abuse scandals, with
thousands of priests accused ofsexual abuse in the United
States alone.
I mean over 3,000.
That's the scale of the crisis.
The Southern Baptist Convention,America's largest Protestant
denomination, has its own crisiswith hundreds of documented
(01:47):
cases.
What makes these scandalsparticularly damning isn't the
abuse, it's the institutionalresponse.
These organizations claimingdivine moral authority
repeatedly move predators frompost to post, prioritizing
protecting the reputation overprotecting children, and silence
the victims.
If the argument is that religionmakes children safer, then I
(02:11):
have to ask, how much worsecould a godless society possibly
be?
And this isn't the indictment ofall believers.
Most religious people arehorrified by these scandals, but
it does reveal somethingcrucial.
Religious institutions don'thave a monopoly on moral
behavior.
In fact, when they claim divineauthority, they often become
(02:32):
less accountable, not more.
And in my response to thatperson, I made a point that
always gets attention.
I said, I commit all theatrocities I want to commit, and
that number is zero.
Now that isn't a boast.
It's an observation about thenature of morality itself.
When someone says the Bible isthe only thing keeping them from
(02:54):
harming others, they'rerevealing something troubling
about their moral foundation.
They're saying their restraintcomes not from empathy or
genuine care of others, but fromfear of punishment, either
earthly or eternal.
By their own admission, they'reone book away from being
dangerous.
This fear-based morality isfundamentally different from
(03:17):
empathy-based morality.
Fear asks, what will happen tome if I do this?
Empathy asks, how will thisaffect others?
One is self-interestedcalculation, and the other is
genuine moral consideration.
Now, most people, religious ornot, operate primarily on
empathy.
They don't hurt others becausethey understand suffering, not
(03:40):
because they're afraid of hell.
They help strangers, not becausescripture demands it, but
because they recognize a sharedhumanity.
The book isn't what makes themmoral.
They were already compassionatehuman beings.
So if it doesn't come from fear,then where does morality come
from?
This is a crucial question.
If morality doesn't come fromGod, then where does it come
(04:01):
from?
And the answer lies in ourevolutionary history.
And it's far more fascinatingthan any religious origin story.
Cooperation and reciprocityappear throughout the animal
kingdom.
Primates share food and comfortdistressed members of their
group.
Dolphins rescue injuredcompanions.
Even rats will free other ratsfrom cages, choosing to help
(04:24):
others claim extra food.
These behaviors suggest that thefoundations of morality,
empathy, fairness, reciprocity,evolved as survival strategies
long before humans developedlanguage, let alone scripture.
Human societies took these basicimpulses and built complex moral
(04:45):
systems around them.
Archaeological evidence showsthat hunter-gatherer groups
enforced fairness and punishedfreeloaders and cared for the
vulnerable thousands of yearsbefore organized religion
appeared.
These societies didn't needdivine commands to understand
that cooperation was essentialfor survival.
(05:05):
The evolutionary perspectiveexplains something that
religious morality cannot, thatwe have moral intuitions that
sometimes contradict what we'retaught.
Why do children as young asthree show preference for
fairness even when no one iswatching?
Why do people across cultures,regardless of religion, tend to
(05:25):
help others in emergencies?
Because those behaviors are justpart of our cognitive
inheritance.
They evolved because they helpedour ancestors survive and thrive
in groups.
And here's where the religiousargument completely falls apart.
Let's look at when scripturelags behind conscience.
If morality truly came fromunchanging divine command, we'd
(05:50):
expect religious texts torepresent the pinnacle of moral
thinking.
Instead, we find the opposite.
Holy books often enshrinepractices we now recognize as
deeply immoral.
Slavery, genocide, thesubjugation of women, the
execution of people forvictimless crimes.
The Bible explicitly endorsesslavery, giving detailed
(06:14):
instructions on how to treatdifferent types of slaves.
It commands the completedestruction of entire peoples,
including children.
It treats women as property,subject first to their fathers
and then to their husbands.
These aren't metaphors orcultural misunderstandings.
They're clear moralprescriptions that most modern
(06:35):
believers now reject.
What's telling is how moralprogress has worked in practice.
It wasn't religious leadersreading scripture more carefully
who ended slavery.
It was abolitionists usingreason and empathy to argue that
human bondage was just wrong,often in direct opposition to
religious authorities whodefended slavery using biblical
(06:57):
passages.
It wasn't deeper theologicalstudy that gave women equal
rights.
It was secular philosophers andactivists who argued for human
dignity regardless of gender.
These patterns repeat throughouthistory.
Moral progress comes not fromdiscovering new religious
truths, but from humans usingreason and empathy to expand our
(07:19):
circle of moral consideration.
All right, quick pause, just fora moment.
If you haven't subscribed yet, Iwould love to have you join the
community here at Atheistvilleand leave a comment.
Your comments help shape thediscussions and let us know what
topics you enjoy.
And I promise, even if werespectfully disagree, I will
respond to you because I enjoythe opportunity to learn
(07:40):
different perspectives.
And one final thing, just reachback to your believer days and
become an evangelist for theshow.
Tell someone else what we'redoing.
I'm trying to get the show outthere to more people, and
recommendations from people likeyou really help.
All right, let's get back to it.
Perhaps the strongest evidenceagainst religious monopoly or
morality comes from looking atthe world itself.
(08:02):
The vast majority of humansaren't Christians, yet they
display the same basic moralbehaviors.
They care for children, theyhelp strangers, they condemn
unprovoked violence, they valuefairness and honesty.
Secular countries like Denmarkand Sweden and Norway
consistently rank highest onmeasures of social trust,
(08:22):
happiness, and safety.
These societies have largelymoved beyond religious
governance, yet they have lowercrime rates, better treatment of
minorities, and stronger socialsafety nets than most highly
religious countries, includingmy own.
For example, according to theWorld Happiness Report, the top
five happiest countries areroutinely secular or have very
(08:45):
low church attendance.
Conversely, highly religiouscountries often score low on
quality of life metrics.
Within the United States,studies consistently show that
less religious states are oftensafer and healthier.
That's going to fly in the faceof what we hear constantly, but
it's true.
They have lower rates of violentcrime, lower teen pregnancy,
(09:08):
less divorce.
The trend is clear.
That doesn't mean religiouspeople are bad.
Far from it.
Correlation is not causation.
I say that all the time, butit's true, correlation is not
causation.
But it does mean that secularsocieties aren't collapsing into
moral chaos, as critics wouldoften predict.
In fact, research by sociologistPhil Zuckerman shows that
(09:30):
secular populations tend to beat least as altruistic, if not
more, than highly religiouspopulations.
When looking at measures likecharity giving to secular causes
and rates of volunteerism.
And the evidence is justoverwhelming.
Morality is not dependent onbelief.
So, what does secular moralityoffer that religious morality
(09:52):
doesn't?
Accountability, for one.
When humans take responsibilityfor moral decisions rather than
deferring to divine authority,we can examine the consequences
of our choices and adjustaccordingly.
We can study what actuallyreduces harm, increases
well-being, and promotesflourishing.
Secular ethics can evolve withnew knowledge.
(10:14):
As we learn more aboutpsychology, sociology, and human
development, we can refine ourapproaches to justice,
education, and social policy.
Religious moral systems,anchored to ancient texts,
struggle to adapt to newunderstandings.
Most importantly, secularmorality recognizes that humans
are both the source of moralproblems and the only available
(10:38):
solution.
We can't pray away child abuseor genocide.
We have to build systems, changelaws, and hold people
accountable.
That's harder than deference todivine authority, but it's also
more honest and ultimately moreeffective.
So let me return to Hope'soriginal question about creating
a safer world for children.
(10:58):
The answer isn't more religion,it's better human institutions.
It's evidence-based approachesto child protection, its
transparent accountabilitysystems, and a commitment to
prioritizing victim welfare overinstitutional reputation.
It's recognizing that moralprogress is a human project,
requiring human effort and humanresponsibility.
(11:21):
It's understanding that empathyand reason, not fear and
obedience, are the foundationsof genuine ethical behavior.
When believers tell me thatfaith makes them more moral, I
want to remind them of somethingimportant.
They were already good peoplebefore they opened that book,
and they'd still be good peopleif they closed it tomorrow.
(11:41):
Their compassion, their desireto help others, their protective
instincts towards children,these aren't gifts from above.
They're expressions of ourshared humanity.
Religion didn't invent morality.
As I said before, it hijackedit.
And then it spent centuriestelling us we were too broken to
fix ourselves.
All right, that's my two cents,unblessed and unfiltered.
(12:02):
Agree or disagree, that's what Igot for you today.
So here's the bottom line: morality is a human creation, (12:04):
undefined
not a divine gift.
We don't need the fear of hellto be good.
We only need empathy and reason.
The work of creating a saferworld for children and for all
of us isn't about praying to ahigher power.
It's about building better humaninstitutions and holding them
(12:25):
accountable.
All right, until next time, I'mMike Smithgull, and I'll catch
you on the next one.
Hey, thanks for tuning in.
I really hope you enjoyed thatshow.
Make sure you like and subscribeto this podcast, it really helps
us out.
If you're interested in video,uh go to our YouTube channel.
That's Atheistville over thereas well.
(12:45):
We have a lot of videos.
That includes our UnholyRoundtable, our panel
discussion.
We talk to different atheistsand take live questions.
We also have more mic drops overthere.
And we do our Ask an Atheistseries where we talk to
individual atheists about theirjourney to get to atheism.
In fact, if you would beinterested in doing a show like
(13:06):
that, I would love to sit downand talk with you.
So let us know.
You can also go to our websiteat atheistville.com.
We have a lot of great contentover there, including our blogs.
So make sure you check us out.
We're trying to be availableanywhere you want us to be.
So again, thanks for tuning in.
And remember that reason andcompassion go a very long way.
Thanks for tuning in.
I'm Mike Smithgall, theunelected mayor of Atheistville,
and this is today's Mic Drop.
A while back, I got a commentthat perfectly captures one of
the most persistent myths aboutatheism.
A member of the community that Iwill call hope and I had a
lovely and friendly exchange,but during the discussion about
(00:22):
morals, they said this the issueis still sin.
How can you want a godlesssociety and yet you still want
to blame God for the issues?
If God were eradicated fromsociety tomorrow, do you
genuinely believe that pure,innocent babies would be born
into a safer world?
(00:42):
Now I responded, but theirquestion deserves a deeper dive
because it touches on somethingfundamental, the relationship
between morality and the conceptof sin.
Today I want to dismantle theidea that our moral compass and
the very definition of goodcomes from God or scripture.
The evidence from biology toanthropology to our own moral
(01:06):
progress tells us a verydifferent story.
Religion didn't invent morality,it hijacked it.
Now let's start our argumentwith what I call the scandal
test.
Let's start with Hope's corepremise that without God,
children wouldn't be safe.
But here's the uncomfortabletruth.
Children haven't beenparticularly safe with God
(01:27):
either.
The Catholic Church has faceddecades of abuse scandals, with
thousands of priests accused ofsexual abuse in the United
States alone.
I mean over 3,000.
That's the scale of the crisis.
The Southern Baptist Convention,America's largest Protestant
denomination, has its own crisiswith hundreds of documented
(01:47):
cases.
What makes these scandalsparticularly damning isn't the
abuse, it's the institutionalresponse.
These organizations claimingdivine moral authority
repeatedly move predators frompost to post, prioritizing
protecting the reputation overprotecting children, and silence
the victims.
If the argument is that religionmakes children safer, then I
(02:11):
have to ask, how much worsecould a godless society possibly
be?
And this isn't the indictment ofall believers.
Most religious people arehorrified by these scandals, but
it does reveal somethingcrucial.
Religious institutions don'thave a monopoly on moral
behavior.
In fact, when they claim divineauthority, they often become
(02:32):
less accountable, not more.
And in my response to thatperson, I made a point that
always gets attention.
I said, I commit all theatrocities I want to commit, and
that number is zero.
Now that isn't a boast.
It's an observation about thenature of morality itself.
When someone says the Bible isthe only thing keeping them from
(02:54):
harming others, they'rerevealing something troubling
about their moral foundation.
They're saying their restraintcomes not from empathy or
genuine care of others, but fromfear of punishment, either
earthly or eternal.
By their own admission, they'reone book away from being
dangerous.
This fear-based morality isfundamentally different from
(03:17):
empathy-based morality.
Fear asks, what will happen tome if I do this?
Empathy asks, how will thisaffect others?
One is self-interestedcalculation, and the other is
genuine moral consideration.
Now, most people, religious ornot, operate primarily on
empathy.
They don't hurt others becausethey understand suffering, not
(03:40):
because they're afraid of hell.
They help strangers, not becausescripture demands it, but
because they recognize a sharedhumanity.
The book isn't what makes themmoral.
They were already compassionatehuman beings.
So if it doesn't come from fear,then where does morality come
from?
This is a crucial question.
If morality doesn't come fromGod, then where does it come
(04:01):
from?
And the answer lies in ourevolutionary history.
And it's far more fascinatingthan any religious origin story.
Cooperation and reciprocityappear throughout the animal
kingdom.
Primates share food and comfortdistressed members of their
group.
Dolphins rescue injuredcompanions.
Even rats will free other ratsfrom cages, choosing to help
(04:24):
others claim extra food.
These behaviors suggest that thefoundations of morality,
empathy, fairness, reciprocity,evolved as survival strategies
long before humans developedlanguage, let alone scripture.
Human societies took these basicimpulses and built complex moral
(04:45):
systems around them.
Archaeological evidence showsthat hunter-gatherer groups
enforced fairness and punishedfreeloaders and cared for the
vulnerable thousands of yearsbefore organized religion
appeared.
These societies didn't needdivine commands to understand
that cooperation was essentialfor survival.
(05:05):
The evolutionary perspectiveexplains something that
religious morality cannot, thatwe have moral intuitions that
sometimes contradict what we'retaught.
Why do children as young asthree show preference for
fairness even when no one iswatching?
Why do people across cultures,regardless of religion, tend to
(05:25):
help others in emergencies?
Because those behaviors are justpart of our cognitive
inheritance.
They evolved because they helpedour ancestors survive and thrive
in groups.
And here's where the religiousargument completely falls apart.
Let's look at when scripturelags behind conscience.
If morality truly came fromunchanging divine command, we'd
(05:50):
expect religious texts torepresent the pinnacle of moral
thinking.
Instead, we find the opposite.
Holy books often enshrinepractices we now recognize as
deeply immoral.
Slavery, genocide, thesubjugation of women, the
execution of people forvictimless crimes.
The Bible explicitly endorsesslavery, giving detailed
(06:14):
instructions on how to treatdifferent types of slaves.
It commands the completedestruction of entire peoples,
including children.
It treats women as property,subject first to their fathers
and then to their husbands.
These aren't metaphors orcultural misunderstandings.
They're clear moralprescriptions that most modern
(06:35):
believers now reject.
What's telling is how moralprogress has worked in practice.
It wasn't religious leadersreading scripture more carefully
who ended slavery.
It was abolitionists usingreason and empathy to argue that
human bondage was just wrong,often in direct opposition to
religious authorities whodefended slavery using biblical
(06:57):
passages.
It wasn't deeper theologicalstudy that gave women equal
rights.
It was secular philosophers andactivists who argued for human
dignity regardless of gender.
These patterns repeat throughouthistory.
Moral progress comes not fromdiscovering new religious
truths, but from humans usingreason and empathy to expand our
(07:19):
circle of moral consideration.
All right, quick pause, just fora moment.
If you haven't subscribed yet, Iwould love to have you join the
community here at Atheistvilleand leave a comment.
Your comments help shape thediscussions and let us know what
topics you enjoy.
And I promise, even if werespectfully disagree, I will
respond to you because I enjoythe opportunity to learn
(07:40):
different perspectives.
And one final thing, just reachback to your believer days and
become an evangelist for theshow.
Tell someone else what we'redoing.
I'm trying to get the show outthere to more people, and
recommendations from people likeyou really help.
All right, let's get back to it.
Perhaps the strongest evidenceagainst religious monopoly or
morality comes from looking atthe world itself.
(08:02):
The vast majority of humansaren't Christians, yet they
display the same basic moralbehaviors.
They care for children, theyhelp strangers, they condemn
unprovoked violence, they valuefairness and honesty.
Secular countries like Denmarkand Sweden and Norway
consistently rank highest onmeasures of social trust,
(08:22):
happiness, and safety.
These societies have largelymoved beyond religious
governance, yet they have lowercrime rates, better treatment of
minorities, and stronger socialsafety nets than most highly
religious countries, includingmy own.
For example, according to theWorld Happiness Report, the top
five happiest countries areroutinely secular or have very
(08:45):
low church attendance.
Conversely, highly religiouscountries often score low on
quality of life metrics.
Within the United States,studies consistently show that
less religious states are oftensafer and healthier.
That's going to fly in the faceof what we hear constantly, but
it's true.
They have lower rates of violentcrime, lower teen pregnancy,
(09:08):
less divorce.
The trend is clear.
That doesn't mean religiouspeople are bad.
Far from it.
Correlation is not causation.
I say that all the time, butit's true, correlation is not
causation.
But it does mean that secularsocieties aren't collapsing into
moral chaos, as critics wouldoften predict.
In fact, research by sociologistPhil Zuckerman shows that
(09:30):
secular populations tend to beat least as altruistic, if not
more, than highly religiouspopulations.
When looking at measures likecharity giving to secular causes
and rates of volunteerism.
And the evidence is justoverwhelming.
Morality is not dependent onbelief.
So, what does secular moralityoffer that religious morality
(09:52):
doesn't?
Accountability, for one.
When humans take responsibilityfor moral decisions rather than
deferring to divine authority,we can examine the consequences
of our choices and adjustaccordingly.
We can study what actuallyreduces harm, increases
well-being, and promotesflourishing.
Secular ethics can evolve withnew knowledge.
(10:14):
As we learn more aboutpsychology, sociology, and human
development, we can refine ourapproaches to justice,
education, and social policy.
Religious moral systems,anchored to ancient texts,
struggle to adapt to newunderstandings.
Most importantly, secularmorality recognizes that humans
are both the source of moralproblems and the only available
(10:38):
solution.
We can't pray away child abuseor genocide.
We have to build systems, changelaws, and hold people
accountable.
That's harder than deference todivine authority, but it's also
more honest and ultimately moreeffective.
So let me return to Hope'soriginal question about creating
a safer world for children.
(10:58):
The answer isn't more religion,it's better human institutions.
It's evidence-based approachesto child protection, its
transparent accountabilitysystems, and a commitment to
prioritizing victim welfare overinstitutional reputation.
It's recognizing that moralprogress is a human project,
requiring human effort and humanresponsibility.
(11:21):
It's understanding that empathyand reason, not fear and
obedience, are the foundationsof genuine ethical behavior.
When believers tell me thatfaith makes them more moral, I
want to remind them of somethingimportant.
They were already good peoplebefore they opened that book,
and they'd still be good peopleif they closed it tomorrow.
(11:41):
Their compassion, their desireto help others, their protective
instincts towards children,these aren't gifts from above.
They're expressions of ourshared humanity.
Religion didn't invent morality.
As I said before, it hijackedit.
And then it spent centuriestelling us we were too broken to
fix ourselves.
All right, that's my two cents,unblessed and unfiltered.
(12:02):
Agree or disagree, that's what Igot for you today.
So here's the bottom line: morality is a human creation, (12:04):
undefined
not a divine gift.
We don't need the fear of hellto be good.
We only need empathy and reason.
The work of creating a saferworld for children and for all
of us isn't about praying to ahigher power.
It's about building better humaninstitutions and holding them
(12:25):
accountable.
All right, until next time, I'mMike Smithgull, and I'll catch
you on the next one.
Hey, thanks for tuning in.
I really hope you enjoyed thatshow.
Make sure you like and subscribeto this podcast, it really helps
us out.
If you're interested in video,uh go to our YouTube channel.
That's Atheistville over thereas well.
(12:45):
We have a lot of videos.
That includes our UnholyRoundtable, our panel
discussion.
We talk to different atheistsand take live questions.
We also have more mic drops overthere.
And we do our Ask an Atheistseries where we talk to
individual atheists about theirjourney to get to atheism.
In fact, if you would beinterested in doing a show like
(13:06):
that, I would love to sit downand talk with you.
So let us know.
You can also go to our websiteat atheistville.com.
We have a lot of great contentover there, including our blogs.
So make sure you check us out.
We're trying to be availableanywhere you want us to be.
So again, thanks for tuning in.
And remember that reason andcompassion go a very long way.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!