Atheist only discussion of morality.

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

There are some atheists that believe in an empirical objective morality.

I dispute that idea. Namely because I have seen no empirical evidence for the existence of objective morality and no believer in an empirical objective morality has presented evidence for that empirical objective morality.

They have presented what they think to be evidence, but the 'evidence' has invariably been some version of a non sequitur. Most often, it has been a variant of the naturalist fallacy.

But the conclusion that natural is moral should not be exempt from the necessary proofs of valid evidence and reasoning.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here.
Acting in a 'moral' manner is so poorly defined that the only clear concepts in it essentially involves treating others as you want to be treated. The golden rule, in other words, along with some BS about ancient religious traditions that no one honestly follows involving promotion of celibacy and abstinence and other retarded sexual and marital restrictions.

It's rooted more in human and animal social behavior that has evolved over time as a part of human sociology. In a sense, it exists, but it's entirely a facility of our social behavior and it changes with different social groups with only some commonalities.