Nihilism

God's holy word, the bible.

You brought this up before and I debunked it before. Is this simply going to be a rehash of our last exchange,?

What about the Quran, Torah, Vedas, Tripitaka, Records Of Ancient Matters, Tao Te Ching ect?

Yup, we have to decide what is right and wrong all by ourselves. just like grown ups.

You can't decide anything regarding morality without an objective moral standard. Anything you claim to be moral without such a standard would be nothing more than an arbitrary preference or opinion.

I agree in part. That's why morals are so arbitrary. Look around the world and see the differences. However, the shared morals are the basics that allow us to live and work together - not arbitrary at all. For me, what appears to be arbitrary is the choice of the end result you want. The kind of society you are trying to build. You alter the moral code to promote those goals. Want men to dominate? Make it okay to beat your woman with an appropriately-sized stick. It's okay with me if someone chooses a set of rules that somebody else figured out (religion, laws) since that job is too big for any one person.

That said, let me suggest this for atheists (and secular society): Decide the end goals you want (rights, freedoms, protections, responsibilities) then use Game Theory to come up with a suitable rule set with our current mores as a starting point. We will be able to derive a landscape of livable societies that come close to meeting those goals. Soon, we'll have enough computing power to model and simulate whole societies and we will be able to figure out how to proceed.

Check out "The Moral Landscape" by Sam Harris. I read the Old Testament cover to cover, so you can make it through that book.

Morals are not arbitrary or subjective - and to suggest that they are is a direct violation of the law of non-contradiction. Your viewing of people in the world embracing varying expressions of morality, being deduced to morals being arbitrary is begging the question, not to mention an argument ad populum fallacy. .

People do what they want and then slap " morality " on that because they don't possess or have jettisoned a Christian world view and epistemology which affords one objective and absolute moral standards to live a moral life, or they simply want to live by their own corrupt nature. . .

That " shared morals are the basics that allow us to live and work together " is once again begging the question. If an objective and absolute standard of morality does not exist - it is no more moral for you and I to live and work together in peace than if we were to throw one another under a bus. You seem to want to conflate personal preferences with moral positions. These are not the same thing.

I really don't see you offering any kind of an argument for arbitrary and/or subjective morality here - just question begging assumptions based on societal preferences.

I have checked it out. I also watched William Lane Craig ( Who I am not really a fan of ) take him apart on his positions being nothing more than one large question begging assumption like you're offering here.

In a nut shell - his view of morality boils down to a Human well being and/or preference, but when Craig pressed him on it, he could not come up with an argument very good answer as to why that's necessarily moral.

I'll have to check out Craig. Anyway, as an atheist, I don't have an ultimate source of what's right and wrong, so I guess I'm stuck with reasoning it out. In my opinion, the universe is only given meaning by us. I can't say that any morality is imperative in the first place, so I don't try and it does not drive me crazy! My brain would smoke if I tried, so your meme is spot-on.