I love Greta Christina’s blog. I’ve read her blog for years, but never commented until she wrote her reasons for not believing in god (Part 1, Part 2). I added a reason of my own in the coments for Part 2 which I will also quote here:
Kind of related to #9, but I think it’s solid enough as its own point:
There is no change or improvement of the moral precepts of a specific religion. Religion is supposed to be our guiding light to live a moral and decent life, yet it does not change to incorporate the new moral dilemmas that arise through time? Issues like capital punishment, stem cell research, equal rights regardless of sexual preference: religion looks at centuries-old documents for an interpretation of what have now become moral dilemmas, either as a truly new situation (stem cell research) or usually as an old situation that now merits closer attention (equal civil rights for GLBT).
A particular religion can rarely change their views on these matters, as they fear it will lessen their authority over the moral lives of its followers. However, secular morals, including the morals of religious adherents, do evolve, and when they evolve enough to make waves in a religion, one of two things happen: a small group of followers splinter into their own sect or, such a splinter group is too large, the religion will change. This second is a rarity that I’ve only seen in the Catholic Church, which seems to be fighting tooth-and-nail to keep their faithful.
If a group splinters off, then the same pattern will hold. It’s only when a religion is in danger of complete irrelevance and death that they will change a moral code to keep followers. There is no natural evolution of moral values because there is no questioning of them. Instead of thinking about what is truly right and wrong, they look for and interpret references in old books. If there is not thought on morality and ethics, then there can be no improvement on them, only stagnation and irrelevance. Since morality is a leading excuse to believe in god, I see the apparently inability of his doctrine and followers to improve morally as a prime reason to think it is all a fiction.
There is little in my life that I can’t relate to morality in one way o another. It’s just one of those things that I think about a lot. If the only change in the moral pecepts of a religion comes through force of its followers (i.e. secularly), then I see little use for god or religion at all.
The Gospel According to Saint Bastard 