Why Secular Morality is Superior

[John V]

1. All your red herring evasion does you no good because religious-based morality has all the same problems.

We don't know that until you define what's really important and the scope of secular morality. It could be that secular morality has issues not found in some religious moralities. This seems to be why you're afraid to consider animal rights.

2. Religious-based morality, in addition to all the conundrums with secular morality, dumps a load of worthless "virtues" and harmless "sins" on top.

Secular morality has worthless virtues and harmless sins of its own. I've mentioned public nudity several times. I'm looking out my window at a flag. There are rules regarding its treatment, some codified, some not, which are worthless/harmless. We have a number of secular holidays. None of these seem to be really important to me, although I'm still waiting for your definition.

3. You need to justify #2 or else admit that religious-based morality complicates the issue needlessly and is therefore inferior.

As shown, secular morality likely has extraneous issues of its own. The problem is that you're afraid to offer definitions.

Yeah, actually it is, especially when the added complexity is needless and not helpful.

Needless and not helpful does not necessarily imply a hindrance. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't.