Francis Schaeffer Quotes

One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion.

Although religion might be useful in developing a solid moral framework - and enforcing it - we can quite easily develop moral intuitions without relying on religion.

Our moral compass - it's always been Judeo-Christian.

My views as a Christian means there's a moral plumb line that I'm fighting to adhere to.

In the past, the respect people had for religion meant that ethical practice was maintained through a majority following one religion or another. But this is no longer the case. We must therefore find some other way of establishing basic ethical principles.

A man cannot have character unless he lives within a fundamental system of morals that creates character.

When one gives up Christian belief one thereby deprives oneself of the right to Christian morality. For the latter is absolutely not self-evident: one must make this point clear again and again, in spite of English shallowpates.

There is no significant example in history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.

If it be true, as I believe it is, that morality is dependent upon religion, then religion is not only the most practical thing in the world, but the first essential.

Science, by itself cannot, supply us with an ethic.

Character is the result of a system of stereotyped principals.

It is always incorrect to assume you can know what someone's moral convictions are based on their philosophical theories.

Don't violate your own code of values and ethics, but don't waste energy trying to make other people violate theirs.

Personally, I think it is possible to build a society that is moral on a nonreligious basis, but the jury is still out on that.

I have no point in my system or morals where I say, 'This is too far.'

Ethics are more important than laws.

Some things must be good in themselves, else there could be no measure whereby to lay out good and evil.

The fundamental basis of ethics must be chosen in some non-scientific way.

Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

I do my research, and if I'm supporting something, then it's because it aligns with me morally and ethically.

Right and wrong as moral principles do not change. They are applicable and reliable determinants whether the situations with which we deal are simple or complicated. There is always a right and wrong to every question which requires our solution.

A different vision of ethics is that of a collection of resources people can use to act better. The resources might be firm rules that could always be relied on. Or they might be ideals that could often be followed without thinking but that sometimes conflicted with one another.

Religion is the only solid Base of morals and that Morals are the only possible Support of free governments.

Morality is the fruit of religion: to desire the former without the latter is to desire an orange without an orange-tree.

In the battle for preserving sound social and moral norms, many religious institutions can no longer be counted as allies.