I don't have to have an opinion or belief system in order to criticize you. Also, my responses in this thread are "Cogent" and fairly easy to understand. It's not all over the place and it's not undistilled. So quit trying to pussy out of responding. Here's a distillation of everything I said: Atheists, as far as morality goes, are equal to religious people; they are in no better position of understanding "net values" and "Objective" morality than atheists are. Also, even if God existed, just like he designed natural physical law, he designed moral law; atheists can understand physical laws, so they should be able to understand moral laws.
I usually criticize you on topic, you just have a problem with seeing weaknesses in your opinions and belief systems.
I'll distill your entire opinion in this thread down to a simple statement: you're begging the question -- on the moral front.
stuff like this kills me though:
If our decisions actually connect us so precisely within society, much like electrical bonds connecting atoms, isn't that just a little too perfect for happenstance?
So like if eveeryone is standing in the same backyard and the sprinklers come on everyone gets wet, isnt that just a little too perfect for happenstance? Thus god exists and athiests can't be moral!
also I would contest the notion that "Our decisions actually connect us so precisely within society" if I felt like it. I don't think there is any amount of precision. It's just a chaotic mass of crap that adds to (but doesn't cause) a causal chain and we all happen to be affected by it because we are proximate to this causal chain since we all live on the same planet.