Why Secular Morality is Superior

[DeistPaladin]

Oh, I get it. You're one of those presuppositionalists, all the rage now with apologists since all their other arguments have been thoroughly trashed.

Click here for my thread dedicated to cataloging all the logical fallacies inherent to this line of thinking.

The belief that we are time + matter + chance doesn't account for the most basic assumptions we take for granted. In this thread it would be morality.

Non-sequitur (which was my point in the post you're responding to). If we evolved by "chance" (in reality, natural selection) that has no relevance to how we should treat one another.

Hint: It isn't HOW we got here. It's that we ARE here.

The best any atheist can give is a single man's opinion or a group of men's opinion on what is good and what is evil.

We've done far better than that (see the OP) but I tire or repeating myself.

Where do you get compassion from in a material only world? It is very arbitrary of the atheist to choose some immaterial "urges" like conscience or compassion, laws of logic or immaterial "oughts" for morality and reject the immaterial God that makes these intelligible.

Conscience, compassion and other urges aren't immaterial. DNA is material. Hormones are material. Synaptic reactions in the brain are material. And if it turns out there is such a thing as a "soul", it clearly works through the brain and that too is material. And what would this "soul" be made of? If it really exists, science will one day understand it and thus, it too will become "material".

You know what they call the "supernatural" when it's proven real?

"Natural".

As for the "laws of logic", these are not things but descriptions for how the universe works. You're getting the cart before the horse here. It's as if a puddle of water were to argue what divine agency created the hole "so perfectly shaped" for it to fit in. This hypothetical puddle of water doesn't realize that it shaped to fit the hole, not the other way around. In a similar way, the "laws of logic" are just descriptions of what is; it is not that what is conformed itself to them.

Man was made in the biblical God's likeness. We rejct him and so there are consequences to that.

Children are made in the likeness of their parents via DNA. Deadbeat or abusive parents still do not have unlimited power to do as they will with their children.

The truth of it isn't subject to your belief nor your understanding.

Logical fallacy: bare assertion.

Mere opinion is not a basis for morality.

I have offered more than mere opinion. As I've repeatedly said, not all subjective evaluations are equal. Some are backed up with facts and logical arguments.

Richard dawkins even said that there is no clear line to be drawn between man and animal. Why then can't we act like them too?

We are part of the animal kingdom (we're not plants, fungus or microscopic organisms). We are also rational beings with more evolved brains. Hence the deist philosophy that we are "rational animals". Clearly, some employ reason better than others.

Why are you even trying to reason with me

Good question. Oh, sorry, you weren't finished...

if this is how I supposedly evovled?

And we're back to your obsession over evolution and how that somehow means nihilism to you.

Notice how whining is exactly what you're doing here.

Well, I guess we all have our own definitions of that term. I use it to mean refusing to deal with reality or take any action but rather sitting there wishing it were different. I stand by my accusation.

Self aware, think, feel, compassion? So these immaterial urges you feel compelled to follow? Lots of inconsistancy throughout your entire post.

Only because you are confused on what "immaterial" means (just like how you're confused about the word "objective").