Objective morality as a proper basic belief

[Astonished]

What do you mean by "with harm as axiomatic to a moral system"? What are you saying this relationship between harm and morality is"

Just stop, you're done.

I don't disagree with that.... I think it is similar what is referred to as an inate sense, in many arguements by theists.

You'd have to be arguing for an objective morality, you aren't. Our innate sense, that provides us with reliable moral guesses, is called "empathy".  It helps us, for example, understand harm.  It doesn't..however, provide or inform us as to an objective moral schema.

And from an evolutionary standpoint it makes far more sense than anything theists claim; otherwise we'd be perfectly fine with slavery instead of instinctively feeling that it's an abhorrent thing. You have to be indoctrinated or sociopathic to think otherwise (or both). Deference to authority also makes more sense in an evolutionary sense because otherwise we would ONLY consider one authority to be viable and yet it can go in any direction imaginable, not towards the alleged 'one true god' and its will.

You just can't remove subjective aspects from it so you have to take that into account. What act is worse than another, whose life is worth more than another if you can only save one or the other, etc., the shitty gritty things we don't deal with as often, thankfully. So while that removes the idea of an absolute authority (which makes no sense anyway) it doesn't render the whole thing irrelevant or incoherent whatsoever. It's all that works with whatever little we have and we don't have anything else that can actually be demonstrated to work in the same consistent way.