pop morality

[Drich]

Again no. Morality at its core a set of rules defining good/bad behavior. Pop morality describes the origins of said rules.

Absolutes/Atonement is freedom from 'moral behavior' and a way to be found righteous despite our failures in morality.

Therefore the model that uses atonement can not be morality because behavior is not what is being judged.

This is just argument by definition.  It's a word game, nothing more.  And by choosing to play it, you forfeit the real game.

You want your arbitrary scheme of vicarious redemption to escape criticism as a moral system, and so you exempt it from consideration by using a custom definition of morality chosen to suit your argument.  Besides being after the fact, it is also wrong.  Living by vicarious redemption is a behavior which you have judged to be good.   Thus, it constitutes a set of morals.

Moreover it's a despicable set of morals in that it denies the debt owed to the wronged party in favor of a magic act which mysteriously takes away guilt.

Two things one it's not a word game. It's a completely different paradigm of obtaining the righteous required to enter heaven. Morality is based on works and behavior. Unless you are an OT Jew this method of seeking righteousness does not apply.

second thing what is 'magic' about a debt you owe being paid by someone else?

Ever had a parent? or were you paying your own way since birth?