Challenge

I am trying to identify a piece of any given modern moral concept that has been given to us from any religion. I find the idea that we cannot be moral without a belief if god and it seems the actions of the pious on behalf of piety seems to have caused more harm than good. I am calling this initiative Value Added Morality (VAM) and so far in my research I can't find a single thing borne of religion we had not had before it. Anything I come up with seems to have originated before, in other cultures or simply common sense.

Any ideas?

Piety is the only thing that comes to mind, but even then it can be debated whether or not religion brought it about.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pious

but piety isn't a good or moral thing, its an obedience thing and can often be immoral.

Most likely you will not find anything because the moral and ethical actions and rules we have grown accustomed to as a society pre-date any forms of written language. They were simple ideas from a tribal sense (hey if I kill Caveman #1 over there, then I have less cavemen to hunt the big game) which eventually evolved into what we would call laws and general curtsies today (don't murder).

i don't think you'll find any.
religious morals derived from societies morals.

I completely agree and I still have yet to find any. It's funny because it's clear even the religious know this to be true as our laws have moved so far away from scripture and religious codes, but as we draw closer to this realization they hit an epoch. Rational vs. irrational. I'm not sure how I will handle not being able to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster anymore....

Originally Posted by infiniti_rob

I'm not sure how I will handle not being able to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster anymore....

Just take it day by day, and smile about those happy memories whenever you eat at an Italian restaurant.

Agape - Selfless, sacrificial love given to all, including our enemies
Benevolence - Doing good for all, including those who hate us.
Grace - Complete, undeserved forgiveness, regardless of the atrocities committed
Atonement - Making up for a stranger's failures by surrendering your own life.
Enduring Peace - Harmonious existence and co-existence without conflict.

These are divine virtues that many aspire to, but seldom, if ever, achieve.
This is the myth of Jesus, the ultimate humanist.

Aside from the fact that you can simpy ask any child who has not been brought up to believe in any religion some questions about morality and "right and wrong" and they will give you an (age appropriate) answer showing they have ethics and morals, the fact that religious practicioners pick and choose the verses and stories from their flavour of scripture or holy text is to me the biggest indictment. Putting aside the origin of their "divine" texts for a moment, one is left with a novel of spectacular extremes, from love and compassion to genocide. When pressed on the fact that they don't follow their word of god 100 percent (including all the nasty bits), they talk about metaphor and things "not to be taken literally". How do they know? They are using their innate human sense of what is right and wrong to try to "make sense" of these stories.

Originally Posted by spidey99

Agape - Selfless, sacrificial love given to all, including our enemies
Benevolence - Doing good for all, including those who hate us.
Grace - Complete, undeserved forgiveness, regardless of the atrocities committed
Atonement - Making up for a stranger's failures by surrendering your own life.
Enduring Peace - Harmonious existence and co-existence without conflict.

All these points except for Atonement are simply the Golden Rule: I'll strive to treat you as I'd like to be treated myself. Nothing particularly earth-shattering here, except perhaps the overwrought language. And I don't think religion has any claim to the Golden Rule. Let me also say that forgiveness does not mean unaccountability. As for Atonement, I'd like someone to explain the definition as stated above. Is this like "Christ dying for our sins"? I've never understood that. Why should someone die for me, or for that matter have to endure any form of punishment, if I have done something that I need to be accountable for? Does that let me off the hook? How does that help us to act responsibly and be accountable for our actions?

I never gave this whole business of religion somehow having the monopoly on ethical and moral behaviour a second thought. It's only recently as I've studied this more and more that I have come to understand how pervasive and ubiquitous this belief is. That people honestly believe a person cannot be moral and ethical without some sort of religious tutelage is insulting and exasperating (but I'm not sure why--maybe it's the innate human in me ). There may be good and evil in the world, but what I think is most galling is the religious believers standing tall saying that you must believe as they do or you are an immoral animal who will go to hell, all the while standing behind an institution responsible for most of the evil done throughout history. As the quote goes, "you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things, bur for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

There is no Value Added Morality. God is a man-made idea. The scriptures are cobbled togther stories, based on all sorts of things, all badly copied and mistranslated, again, by men. Religions are man-made institutions created so that a few elite -- you guessed it -- men could to hang on to power and control populations and specifically, I might add, women. Man created religion, man interprets and uses religion to his own ends, and any morality (or lack thereof) attributed to religion is from man. Directly. No middlemen. Sorry, Pope.