Agnosticism IS the most dishonest position

[Simon Moon]

The batshit arguments and condescension are just minor side effects of a person discounting shared attributes of humanity on account of the other person not believing in pixies, or the right pixies.  The full effect of that beyond the boards is a great deal worse.

Anywho, it's probably not accurate to state that empathy defines right and wrong.  Empathy is recognition.   Empathy tells us that we're looking at something meaningful to us, a situation with moral import, but it doesn't tell us why that situation has moral import to recognize.  Approached from another angle, failures of empathy - the lack of empathy in an individual will not certify that the thing apprehended is not wrong.  

Empathy as the right or wrong-making property is actually the same moral assertion as god defining right and wrong.  Natural subjectivism as opposed to supernatural subjectivism.

I think that me feeling bad if I hurt someone is because I can put myself in their position. I think it is kind of telling that its bad. I know its more complex than that but I do think it plays a role.

Indeed.

A secular moral system, that is superior to any religious moral 'system', is not rocket science. As long as the goal of the moral system is well being. First of all, theistic moral 'systems' are not systems at all, they are moral edicts, set down by some god.

Secular morality:

We are all physical beings, living in the same physical universe, subject to the same physical laws.

We can all agree (with some exceptions; terminal illness for example), that: life is preferable to death, health is preferable to disease, pleasure is preferable to torture, freedom is preferable to slavery. etc.

What is harmful to my well being, is almost certainly harmful to other's well being.

From those simple precepts, it is not hard to come up with a moral system, that tries to achieve the best for our well being.

It's not too difficult to understand why murder, slavery, theft, rape are immoral. Just ask the f'n victims if their well being is being harmed. Zero gods required.

Another way to think about it, is John Rawls' 'Veil of Ignorance'.

Let me make a late addition:

This moral system is not subjective, it is based on the objective facts about reality and the universe. The goal, well being, could be said to be subjective. But, anyone that doesn't agree with that goal, probably ended their own life.