If a deity requires its followers to worship it (the case for most deities) then that deity is, in my mind, tyrannical.  I feel tyranny is immoral, as is supporting tyranny.  So yes, I would say that person is morally wrong.

Did this guy just prove that the "god-fearing" wouldn't know this was wrong unless a book told them so?  That's more than a little frightening.  No wonder about the priest-baby-rapers...they figure they can just do a few Hail Marys and get off the hook to do so again, and again, and again.  And really, a Christian asking what would be wrong with burning a girl (and/or women) in a fire?  Um, has he heard about the Inquisition?  The Crusades?  Salem?  Any of that?  Apparently not.  Chuckg6261982, bible-thumpers such as yourself have been doing what you describe for CENTURIES whilst telling us we're the sinners.  The only rule of pagans is "Harm none" (and was long before your Jesus even existed) and your people kidnapped and killed them by fire for that (often after gang-raping them); put that in your hypocritical pipe and smoke it. 

Morality is based upon human instinct. It is human instinct to want to live, happily. But, in order for me to live happily, there has to be a moral code that prevents people from infringing upon my ability to do so. I would also have to respect that moral code, because if I break it I become a hypocrite and people would be justified in taking action against me.

Thus, it is wrong to kidnap, rape, hold somebody against their will, torture, kill, and desecrate, all because if I do so, then I make it okay for others to do so against me.

I believe the religious form of this would be "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Can you tell me why my explanation is inadequate?

And why don't you respond yourself?

Well first you hurt and traumatised an innocent human being who has done nothing to provoke you in any way and have killed them for that reason, which is cruel meaningless and thus you deserve the same fate, but even though you deserve it, I nor anyone else would administer that punishment for the same reason as that it is cruel and meaningless. By the way if you asked for forgiveness to ' the lord Jesus Chrst' would you be elidgible for heaven? Moreover if that little girl was an athiest at the time, would she go straight to hell?

the more morally accomplished I get - same as my friends and family. And this leads me to contend that morality is not some inherent thing but it's learned and polished all our lives long. There's a reason some old people are so incandescent in their goodness and integrity. They've been in class a long time. Think of your own journey. Think of being a selfish kid who could only think of one person. Think of the lessons who learned when you hurt other people and they hurt you. Think of the lessons you learned when you have children and you had to put your immediate self to one side. I think humans are a work in progress. Morality is not some god-given on/off switch. 

That fact you caused that little girl tremendous pain and took a life when yours wasn't in danger, duh. Weak "point", try another.

Besides your God doesn't find it wrong, read the Old Testament. Hell(no pun intended) isn't that similar to what the Spaniards did to the Natives?

This question is so stupid.  I'm so tired of this argument for morality.  What makes obviously wrong things wrong?  The awnser is obvious, and its such a bad argument I think people here have done a good job explaining it. 

make yet another lousy attempt at appearing to have a superior moral system.

As it has already been pointed out, we see horrors condoned in the bible by God.

Furthermore, we see nothing superior about the 10 commandments. If theists would like to take each one of them and look closely at them, there is absolutely nothing in there that is superior. If a thiest would like to challenge that, please do clarify which would be.Finally, christians themselves can't seem to agree with each other about what things are essential. Since christians find their morality to be based on God, then why do christians still grapple with things amoung themselves on many issues?

Issues vary from extremely petty to what could be considered serious in nature depending on one's theology. How is that Holy Spirit communicating so many different moral viewpoints to you all?

Disagreement on divorce/remarriage

Disagreement on war

Disagreement on birth control

Disagreement on abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research and other related topics

Disagreement on ordination of women, positions on homosexuality and subcategories under that topic

Disagreement on proper worship of God, interpretation of texts, and what to do if one violates a commandment

The list is endless, and I for one will not sit back and take any christian seriously when they are in such a dissary themselves while standing on a pedastal claiming high moral ground victory while this is still going on and will continue to go on with no end in sight.

If christianity helps you to be less of a burden to society by keeping you from doing things like what you ask about in your OP, then I guess you need to examine why it does.

People who lack empathy do have brains that operate differently to those that do:

http://ccsn.uchicago.edu/events/Decety_BiologicalPsy2008.pdf 

Isn't "evilness" (I assume you're talking about a lack of empathy) a symptom?

I personally think that the idea of punishment is morally bankrupt and shouldn't exist in our legal system, the purposes of a justice system should be limited to rehabilitation, deterrence and separating them from society to stop them from doing other "evil" things.

Then perhaps Brian Sapient should shut down this website?

Your morality comes from within you because despite your fallen nature, God's moral law is still written upon your heart. 

I'd be interested in a response to my post to your OP, but I expect it will not be forthcoming.

To answer your post here:

1) Atheism does not account for morality, nor does pantheism, or any other "ism" Because, as I pointed out to you in my post it does not matter what your label is in society, you will still end up making decisions that may or may not line up with your label. Christians can not claim their morality is the gold standard nor is any bit of it original at all.

2) God's existance is "known" to you. Therefore you hate all the same people he does. That's a lot of people my friend. And, your community as a whole has put segments of society over the years in what could be called social concentration camps by endorsing slavery, and attempting to stop homosexuals from having the same legal rights as everyone else has. You may or may not also be discriminating against men with beards, women who don't cover their heads, and a multitude of other things far to long to list here within your own bubble. As long as you feel you are doing these things with the permission of God, there is no end in sight to the numbers of people you can attempt to shove your version of morality upon. We are simply here to stop you from that tyranny.

(1) Morality has nothing to do with our ability to be consistent with the laws themselves.  Christianity is possibly the only religion which acknowledges this.

(2) Actually, God does not hate anybody.  Hating another person is against God's law and God cannot violate his own laws.  He does hate sin, however.  The rest of what you've written contains oversimplications of old social norms and contemporary political issues.  The bible never endorses slavery-- allowing it and not saying that it is bad does not amount to an endorsement.  The physical punishment of slaves was permitted.  Forcing a person to be your slave was prohibited.  Hence, the bible is neutral on the entire issue but does give guidelines for how to handle an institution that is already in place.  Christianity does not forbid homosexuals from their legal rights, but it does forbid them from hijacking the term "marriage" in order to avoid getting their feelings hurt.  People are free to be sinners.  There are plenty of things which are against God's law but not against man's civil law.  Homosexuality is one of those things.  But we are not going to sanctify it or normalize it under the banner of political correctness.

Anyway, this stuff about Christianity is a diversion.  Christianity aside, if God does not exist, then everything is permitted.

Only God enforces His own laws.  We do not.  Sin is against God and only God.  When you sin, you are accountable to Him and nobody else.

That leaves us responsible to deal with finite transgressions which affect us temporarily.  When we put someone in jail for murder, we do not place him there because he violated God's law.  We place him there because he violated our laws.  We thus balance our own injustices.  When creating a legal system, we can use God's law as a guiding post, but we have to recognize that we cannot please God by our works.  We cannot atone for sin, only God can.  Plus, to put other people in danger by allowing killers to roam the street would itself be a sin to God. 

When a society segments groups of people it inhibits diverse genetic recombination which in turn inhibits its ability to evolve, which in turn inhibits its ability to survive as a society.

When a society oppresses people, those people are more likely to revolt violently, thereby killing members of the society and thus inhibiting the society's chance of survival.

Thus it is in the society's best interest not to place groups in concentration camps.  Thus the society should not use concentration camps.  No god is needed to reach this conclusion, only logic and mathematics.

Great point!  Let me modify my position then:

If God does not exist, then there is no real reason why a society should not be allowed to place TEN people in a concentration camp just for the fun of it.  Certainly torturing 10 people would not inhibit a society's ability to survive, right?!

I suggest that every year, we pick 10 random Muslims and place them in concentration camps.  We will make them shave their heads, enter the gas chamber, bathe in cold water, and test wine with antifreeze in it.  It will be okay because 10 people are not enough to inhibit a society's ability to survive.

Great idea, eh?  Eh?

That's why we will only oppress TEN people.  Then we will not inhibit society's chances of surviving.  Certainly a revolt of 10 people could not do any harm, could it?

But it would not affect society if we placed 10 people in a concetration camp.  Thus there is no reason why we should not place 10 people in concentration camps.

The sad thing is, the first people to think up such a plan and try to execute the 10 muslims each year would be fundamentalist christians.

Do you acknowledege that sin is only against God and that human beings cannot atone for sin against God by enforcing civil laws?

Is confession just for catholics?  Because that would certainly involve man in the whole 'sin is only god's to deal with.'

I acknowledge no such thing. I do believe you are espousing a christian viewpoint. It may be helpful if you refer back to my earlier post where I ask you imagine each time God is used in your sentence replace it with bobo the clown, and that is how it sounds to me. I'm sure you can't expect me as a non theist to accept the statement you made above, or take it seriously.

Torturing 10 people could lead to unrest.  How would you feel living in a society where you could be randomly chosen to be tortured. Even if not random the sear violence alone displayed by the ones torturing people would cause a bit of a concern.  How would the people who cared about those 10 react.  This affect the cohesiveness of the society. Your implicated that the 10 people know no one and that no one has any attachment to them.

 To suggest a god is needed for morality is to suggest that morals are not useful and provide no benefit.  Sympathy and compassion are traits that evolved since it helped keep a society stable.  You are suggesting that sympathy doesn't exist. Or are you suggesting that societies that do already do these horrendous acts are more successful than those that don't.