What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Randy Carson]

Some atheists who believe that objective moral right and wrong really do exist, a position also called moral realism, say they simply know that these moral truths exist, and that’s good enough for them.

Is that an opinion you've found expressed by anyone on this forum?  Because atheism is not a philosophy, and I really could care less what "some atheists" think unless it's a good thought.

Many atheists see to think moral realism is obvious, and easy to prove. I disagree.

Why bother to attack what isn't being argued?  Because it's easier than what's actually being said here and now?  I see no point in collectively discussing opinions not raised in the thread.  If you are a moral relativist fine.  Otherwise, why waste time shutting down an opinion not even raised.  Talk with the atheists you are talking to, not some atheists you find elsewhere.

Jenny-

Two reasons come to mind.

First, I think there is more moral realism at work in the minds of some here than might be apparent at first glance.

Second, I want to point out that atheists are fond of saying that as science discovers more of the natural reasons behind the things that we observe, there is less and less for the Gotg to do.

Now, as I read the posts of the various members of this forum, it seems that y'all can pretty much believe in anything you want about God as long as you don't actually believe IN God.

However, when I read more astute atheists like Tim O'Neill and Luke Muehlhauser debunking the Jesus' Mythers' ignorance of history and the logical fallacies that are inherent in the fuzzy moral thinking of many atheists, respectively, I begin to note that there is less and less for unthinking atheists to believe.