Morality

[The Grand Nudger]

-then your moral views are secular....and likely humanist.  If you could hold them in the absence of your god beliefs then theres nothing about my being an atheist that would prevent me from holding the same.

No, I’d be a platonic theist. I’d be a theist that doesn’t subscribe to any particular religion.

IOW you made a misleading claim about your moral positions.  You would have to retain -some- of your christian beliefs, such as the belief in a god.  Well, that actually doesn't prevent your moral positions from being secular either...but I think that you're trying to walk this one back...so we'll go with the new line.  

Your moral positions would change if you didn't believe in gods.  Okay, and?  Mine are the same regardless.  That's part of why gods are irrelevant to my life in the way that they're relevant to yours.  You'd turn into a moral nihilist if you found out you were wrong about some god thing.  IDK how that's supposed to work..but it strongly suggests that your morality is based on purported god facts, not moral facts.  

What’s correct do “we” set the boundaries of what we ought to do and what we ought not do,

OFC we do. Look all around you, all of these people setting all of these boundaries.  It's completely ludicrous to even attempt to argue against this point?  

or do the moral facts that exist independently of us set the boundaries?

Moral facts are incapable of setting deontological borders, they just don't possess that ability any more than they possess the agency required to effect such a thing.  They're just true statements with a moral import.  

I'll only go over this one more time..and then I'll expect you to understand moving forward.  In order to derive an ought..a deontological border..from an is, a moral fact..at least one evaluative premise must be supplied.  This is  non negotiable.  This is the is-ought distinction.  We supply these premises.  We don't find them out there in the way that we find those moral facts to which we refer*.  This is why moore took to calling them "non natural" facts...he didn;t mean to imply what you likely think he did, more to distinguish them from what he considered to be empirical facts (the existence of your god, btw, would be just such an empirical fact, not a moral fact).

*again, assuming realism for the sake of convenience.

If us, than the boundaries are relativistic, set by the communities and cultures who construct them.

This doesn't follow.  

If it’s the moral facts themselves, then this negates your previous claim that they don’t posses aims or oughts.

See above.

No I wouldn’t have the same moral views if we weren’t born in the image of God or something equivalent to it. The world in which these beliefs are true is very different than one in which it isn’t. Its a world in which all is permissible, which ours is not.

You're not a moral realist.  You don't refer to moral facts, you refer to purported god facts.  I don't know why everything would be permissible just because fairies aren't watching you piss.  Can you explain to me why you think that would be so?  Obviously I don't..I think that moral facts are what they are regardless of what some god fact may be.   So, if theres no peeper god handing us his subjective rules of permissibility...then it doesn't matter a single iota to me or my realists morality..nor does it matter to me or my realists morality if there are.

There are assholes with permission lists in real life that don;t affect my moral appraisals....no need to invoke the tooth fairy, right?  

It wouldn’t really be a matter of choice, so much as it would just be matter of recognition that the moral structures you appeal to have no clothes, lack any real foundation, which can be flicked away by my fingers.

Obviously, if the moral structure that you appeal to is god fact based rather than moral fact based then the absence of a god would hollow out your moral system.  Since mine isn;t god fact based...it won;t have that effect on me.  

You and your friends telling me I have a moral obligation to do x, would be as laughable as you telling me I have an obligation to pay off your student loans. An unbound moral obligation, is the emperor with no clothes, geese trying to tame lions.

Like I said, some people can't be compelled.  We have bricks and cages for people like that...and it sounds like you'd need one..if you ever lost your faith.

You and your ilk tend to rely on the structures of my moral beliefs, in order to even make yours even remotely work. Take those away, it’s just the lambs whining about the birds of prey.

Why do you think my morality has anything to do with your belief in fairies?

You realize that you're starting to come off the rails..right?