If it wasn't for religion

[Angrboda]

What you have, is a tired old line parroted endlessly and breathlessly by fundy dipshits..that you imagine to be some profound comment on the nature of morality or rights.  You could disabuse yourself of this misapprehension quickly and thoroughly if you listened to what people are telling you, rather than insisting that they must be x y and z.

I do listen, that's why I continually point out the contradictions and inconsistencies in your moral views, and why you run and hide from simple yes or no questions. I can listen to what someone delusional is telling me, or suffering from cognitive dissonance is telling me, but I can't expect them to fully grasp their delusions and dissonance. Such as your insistence of believing in moral realism, while at the same time arguing as if moral subjectivism is true.

lol. "Physician, heal thyself!" Yet another Dunning-Kruger with zero personal insight, deficient wisdom, and a whole heaping bucket full of projection.

---

We can argue that killing is wrong, while also arguing that we ought to kill.

That would like saying we can argue that something is impressible, while also arguing that it is permissible.

"Wrong" implies we ought not do it.

In that case then you've expressed an analytic truth by saying that we ought to do what is good, not given us a moral precept dictated by reality except in the most trivial sense, and that sense is not relevant to the question. So by your own admission, you have not provided a moral truth that is dictated by reality. All you've done is take advantage of what ought and good mean, which has fuckall to do with "what" one ought to do and how reality provides that moral. So, we're back to unfogged's original question. Name a moral that is provided by reality. So far, you have not done so.

---

If you're a moral subjectivist, a moral nihilist, you're far more likely to be an atheist than a theist.

If you're trying to say that atheists are more likely to be moral nihilists than theists, I don't think that's true. More theists embrace moral nihilism than atheists by a long shot, largely because they don't realize that founding your moral views on God is itself a form of moral nihilism, it's just a particular coat that moral nihilism wears. And the reason theists don't realize this is multifold, but one of them is that theists are not particularly insightful about their own beliefs, particularly being that they are heavily invested in confirming their beliefs rather than understanding or even falsifying them. If what you meant was that atheists are more likely to be moral subjectivists than atheists, that's not entirely clear either, as theism seems to reduce to moral subjectivism, again, with theists simply not realizing this for a variety of reasons.