Do you wish there's a god?

[The Grand Nudger]

  Your morality may be based on aesthetics, the attractiveness or unattractiveness of an idea...in which case it's a subjective morality. 

This is silly. I’m a biological being, and my morality as it functions and operates, or in the real world, and not just some convoluted thought in my head, is shared in common with every other human being. If you imagine your moral perceptions operate differently than other human being like myself, your beliefs are just rubbish, complete nonsense. It’s more a product of wishing your moral perceptions to operate differently, than how they actually operate. There’s no real correlation between moral reasoning, the sort you built you built your silly moral philosophical view on, and proactive moral behavior.

You just lack the self-awareness, to recognize that we function as biological beings, and not robots or calculators.

I accept that you view morality through the lens of what you find aesthetically pleasing.  I specifically laid out both that and how I'm human just like you and that subjectivity is just as much a part of who I am as it is who you are. 

I just don;t elevate that to the status of my moral framework.

There’s no real correlation between moral reasoning, the sort you built you built your silly moral philosophical view on, and proactive moral behavior.

...aaaaand now we've abandoned yet another failed set of assertions and galloped away at full speed.  My moral proactive behavior is very much connected to my moral reasoning.  Yours may not be, and if that's the case, I'll accept this new claim you make about yourself and your own morality as well. You're simply confirming descriptive moral subjectivity, which I already accept to be true.

I see ugliness exactly where you see ugly. Such as its ugly to kill people, even when done for good reasons. But I don’t conflate the means with the ends. I agree the means can be ugly. Killing someone to protect the family I love might be ugly. But the wellbeing of my family is something I’m drawn, attracted to preserve, is precious.

It's highly unlikely that you and I have uniformly equivalent aesthetic tastes, but if you want to agree with me that the good can be ugly, then so be it it?  The final moral value of some ugly act may affect it's moral status..but it won't make me see that thing as an end or a means as any less ugly or any more beautiful than I do. Here again you run into the wall of an irreducible fact of my perception, which differs from your own, and which no argument you offer has the force to alter.

Irreducible facts like these, combined with my own moral conclusions, by the way, are often why no amount of sophisticated theology can rescue this or that religion, as I've commented on before. If we look at christianity, for example. I object to vicarious redemption on moral grounds, but I also find it aesthetically repulsive. It's unlikely that a person could convince me that my moral conclusion is in error, but even if they could, that wouldn't make it any less repulsive. The dual effect of these two distinct things makes my ever becoming a christian, even if I believed in a god (yet another improbable hypothetical), a practical impossibility.

You just fail to acknowledge that beauty, aesthetic aspects of what I’m speaking of are  in regards to moral ends. and the ultimate moral goals, we’re attempting to serve, in which we might use a variety of means ugly and pretty to preserve.

You should probably limit those bits of moral and aesthetic subjectivity to yourself.  They would be facts about you, after all.