Delusions of Grandeur

As the title of my Blogspot attests, I profess to being an atheist.  Recently, I have had friends suggest that I'm not REALLY an atheist, I just WANT to be an atheist and because I also describe myself as a "seeker" that means I'm REALLY an agnostic (like that somehow makes me more redeemable, I'm guessing).  Well, that's an interesting statement.  That's like me telling my believer friends that they aren't REALLY believers, they just THINK they are believers.  The stumbling block seems to be my interest in theology.  Well, I'm here to say that yes, an atheist CAN be interested in theology and be a seeker without secretly longing for a conversion.  Like any body, I want to know "THE TRUTH" too.  I just don't think I KNOW, in the full sense of the word.  I have a strong intuititve sense, but in my philosophy, that counts as a hypothesis, not a truth.  I seek knowledge to confirm or contest my hypothesis.  So far, I am aware of little/no conclusive evidence of a god.  I am an atheist, despite what others would like to believe.  

What I DO have is a deep respect for the comfort many people derive from their respective spiritual practices.  Even atheists have been known to express a deep sense of "rightness" in their take on the way of things.  So, despite our differences, we still have commonalities -- we're all the same species with a great number of cross-cultural "human" values.  Recently, my commitment to my values has been tested in a variety of ways, and because I am a seeker, I went seeking whether I was a "GOOD" person or whether I should rethink my values.  Much of my interest in this grew out of discussions I had with my believer friends.  In many circles, the prime question is: "Can one be 'good without god' ?".  My first response to my inquiry was "Yes, of course I'm a good person!  I stick to the rules!  I'm a "responsible child", how could I NOT be a good person!?". Well, I think that answering that question may be alot harder for atheists than it is for believers.  In the world of believers, morality is prescribed by god.  For atheists, it is not, although it is bounded by societal norms.  So, when I went to describe my values I also found myself inquiring of the societal norms that applied to me, as a citizen of the U.S. and as a citizen of the world ( to quote Socrates).  

What I think I have come to better appreciate after all of this is that at their core, many belief systems share similar values (makes one wonder if all deities are from the same family, ey?).  Be that as it may, where differences arise, they seem to focus our tendency to factionalize people as either "us" or "them".  The distinction can become ever more refined as one drills deeper and deeper into a particular group, until you ultimately arive at "the individual".  This, of course, is not a new idea with me.  I'm just trying to fathom the question why believers may feel sorry for non-believers, or why I may feel the need to reassure myself that I do, indeed, have a valid moral code, despite being a non-believer.  As an atheist, I am acutely aware of being an "other".  You know, "not saved", or perhaps, an "infidel".  When I travel abroad, I kind-of expect to feel my otherness, but strangely, I often feel it most acutely within my own peer group.  Its as if social structures are inherently unstable, always trying to divide themselves.  Make more little factions which, in time, may grow into bigger factions that must again divide or collapse.  One might think of this as a deist-based limitation on empire building.  What a strange thought?!

But, I digress!  Back to the question of 'goodness without god'...  I personally feel that there is sufficient evidence from the World's divine texts to suggest that there is at LEAST a double standard between the moral codes that dieties hold themselves to (assuming, if you will, that they exist at all) and those codes they hold their followers to.  This would suggest that there is no true "universal" moral code that covers both man and god.  But what about cross-cultural consistencies in moral codes?  Can't we, as a world community, recognize those commonalities and use them as a basis for moral judgements?  I think we can and we must if we are to avoid religiously based factionalism and its apparently inevitable consequence of violent intolerance.  Perhaps I suffer from delusions of grandeur when I think that mankind can establish an internally consistent moral code for itself, without the imposition of an "all-powerful being's" concepts of morality.  But if not, I fear that we may be destined to revisit the atrocities of our forefathers.