How Religion Corrupts Our Sense of Morality

Religion, for centuries, has claimed to be the foundation of moral principles. It promises to give us a clear sense of right and wrong, a moral compass if you will.

But is this really the case? Does religion actually enhance our moral judgment, or does it corrupt it by adding unnecessary and often harmful layers of dogma and obedience to divine authority?

The truth, as I will argue, is that religion compromises our ability to make moral decisions by obstructing our natural human instincts, stifling reason, and justifying some of the worst behaviors in human history.

At first glance, religion seems like a straightforward path to moral behavior. Most religious teachings advocate kindness, charity, and love for others. Many religious people are good, compassionate individuals who contribute positively to their communities.

But we must ask ourselves: are these people good because of their religion, or despite it? This distinction is critical, as religion often introduces harmful, contradictory elements that distort our natural sense of right and wrong.

The Problem with Blind Obedience

Imagine this scenario: a loving Christian family—parents, children, and pets—attend church regularly, pray, and contribute to charity. They are decent, moral people. But then, someone breaks into their home, ties them up, tortures them, and kills their pets. When the police ask why, the perpetrator says, “No reason, the devil made me do it.” We all agree: that a person is a moral monster. Hands down.

Now consider this: in the Bible, specifically the Book of Job, God permits Satan to torture Job—a good and righteous man. Job’s children are killed, his livestock destroyed, and he himself is afflicted with painful boils.

Why? The Bible tells us that God did it “for no reason,” simply because Satan provoked Him. If we think the devil is evil for encouraging harm for no reason, shouldn’t we also question the morality of a God who does the same?

Yet, when you ask a religious audience whether they believe the God of the Bible is a moral monster, far fewer hands go up. Why is that? This is where religion begins to compromise our moral judgment.

We become so loyal to the idea of God as a perfect being that we stop questioning actions that we would otherwise find abhorrent. Religion trains us to excuse immoral behavior if it’s attributed to divine will, making us complicit in justifying cruelty.

Religion as an Obstruction to Moral Judgment

At its core, religion often adds unnecessary layers that obstruct our natural moral instincts. Think about how you might react if you saw someone in need on the street. Most people’s first impulse, their human instinct, is to help.

But religion might tell you to pause and think: Does this person deserve help? Are they being punished by God for their sins? Are they of the “right” faith or moral standing?

This extra layer of consideration—what does my religion say I should do?—actually gets in the way of spontaneous compassion. It corrupts what should be a straightforward decision to help another human being. In many cases, religion complicates morality by introducing the idea that only certain people deserve kindness, while others, deemed “sinners,” deserve punishment.

One of the most blatant examples of this is found in Christianity’s teachings about salvation. According to Christian doctrine, you must accept Jesus Christ as your savior to be saved and receive eternal life. This belief divides people into “saved” and “unsaved,” and for some, it becomes the primary lens through which they judge others.

Instead of viewing people as inherently worthy of respect and kindness, religion teaches its followers to categorize others based on their beliefs.

The Moral Monster Paradox

Let’s take a closer look at the story of Job, which raises profound moral questions. In Job 2:3, God acknowledges that He allowed Satan to destroy Job’s life “without cause.”

This means that God subjected a good, blameless man to extreme suffering just to prove a point. If we heard of a human being who did this—inflicted immense suffering on another person for no reason—we would immediately label them a moral monster.

So why don’t we apply the same judgment to God? The reason is simple: religion teaches us to submit to God’s will without question. We are trained to believe that God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and beyond our understanding. But this kind of reasoning is dangerous because it allows people to excuse even the most heinous actions if they believe they are following divine orders.

If we wouldn’t excuse a human for committing atrocities “for no reason,” why should we excuse God?

The Problem with Divine Commands

One of the biggest issues with religion is that it ties morality to divine commands. For example, in Islam, followers are commanded to be kind and generous—but kindness is often framed as an obligation to God, not necessarily as an intrinsic value. This is where the moral integrity of religious actions comes into question.

Imagine meeting a person who is only nice to you because their God commands it. Would you feel genuinely respected and valued, or would you feel like their kindness is a mere obligation? In many religious contexts, kindness isn’t about human empathy; it’s about following orders from above. The problem with this is that it treats morality as a duty rather than a deeply felt sense of connection with others.

A Muslim man I debated in Queens, New York, gave me a gift after our debate, following the teachings of Allah. While I appreciated his gesture, it raised a troubling question: was he being nice to me because he wanted to or because his religion instructed him to? The difference matters. True morality comes from within, not from external commands.

Fear of Hell, Promise of Heaven: Bad Reasons for Good Actions

Religious morality is often motivated by two things: the promise of Heaven and the fear of Hell. But what does this say about the nature of morality? If you’re only doing good because you fear eternal punishment or hope for eternal reward, does that truly make you a good person?

Consider this: If you’re only honest because you think someone is watching, are you truly honest? If you’re only generous because you believe it will earn you a spot in paradise, are you truly generous? The morality taught by religion is often transactional—be good, and you’ll be rewarded; be bad, and you’ll be punished.

True morality, on the other hand, is based on doing good for its own sake. Humanists and secular thinkers argue that we should be good because we recognize the inherent value in other people and in living a harmonious life. Religion, by contrast, undermines this by attaching a system of rewards and punishments to moral behavior.

Religion and the Justification of Atrocities

History is rife with examples of how religious beliefs have been used to justify some of humanity’s worst actions. Slavery, for instance, was not only tolerated but often explicitly endorsed by religious texts. Jefferson Davis, the president of the Confederacy, once said that slavery was supported by the Bible, and he wasn’t wrong. The Bible does contain passages that endorse slavery, particularly in the Old Testament.

If we were to apply a modern moral lens, we would easily see that slavery is wrong—it strips people of their humanity and freedom. But religious texts, written thousands of years ago, reflect the social norms of their time, and as a result, they often endorse practices that we now find barbaric. The fact that religious people have to “edit” their holy books, ignoring the problematic parts, shows that our true sense of morality comes from somewhere else—our own human instincts.

As Harris, Hitchens, and others have pointed out, if the Bible were the ultimate source of morality, it would contain clear, unequivocal condemnations of slavery, genocide, and the subjugation of women. But it doesn’t. Instead, these texts often reflect the prejudices of the societies that created them. The fact that we now see these practices as immoral suggests that our moral understanding has evolved, often despite religious teachings, not because of them.

The Golden Rule and Our Ethical Intuition

One of the most famous moral principles found in religious texts is the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This idea, while present in the Bible, is not exclusive to Christianity. Variations of the Golden Rule can be found in many cultures and religions throughout history. It reflects a basic human intuition about how we should treat each other.

But here’s the catch: the Golden Rule works not because it’s a divine command, but because it taps into our innate sense of empathy and fairness. We don’t need religion to tell us that treating others with kindness and respect is a good idea. In fact, we can find this wisdom in the secular, humanistic traditions that have evolved alongside religion.

Conclusion: Morality Beyond Religion

In the end, religion doesn’t enhance our moral judgment—it compromises it. By tying morality to divine commands, religious doctrines add unnecessary and often harmful layers that distort our natural sense of right and wrong. Whether it’s excusing atrocities committed in the name of God, justifying immoral behavior with divine authority, or basing good actions on the fear of punishment, religion gets in the way of genuine moral understanding.

As human beings, we are capable of being good without God. Our moral instincts are a product of our evolution, our empathy, and our shared experiences as social creatures. We don’t need the threat of Hell or the promise of Heaven to know that kindness, compassion, and fairness are values worth upholding.

So, the next time someone tells you that we need religion to be moral, remember: it’s not religion that makes us good—it’s our humanity. And that’s something we can all celebrate, with or without a belief in the divine.