I'm always confounded when people tell me they use 'reason' or 'logic' to decide what is right and what is wrong. It seems to me that although we can reason about whether our judgements agree with one another (are more-or-less consistent), it seems impossible to simply reason morality.

Let's take a test case: How does one use logic to decide that rape is wrong or immoral?

Personally, I think rape is wrong because it steals a person's dignity, forcefully makes the victim merely an object for someone else's pleasure, and profanes the sacredness of human trust and intimacy

Do you see how there is no logic there? It's a powerful appeal to our emotions, just as morality should be. Morality is about human experience, which logic cannot teach us.

Now here's something I reason about: How to prevent rapists.

To prevent rape, we ought to make it illegal and punish those who rape others with long prison terms and little possibility of parole. If these punishments are effective then they will deter rape.

Here, I have given a rational means to achieving a goal. In other words, if the method is rational, then the means will achieve the goal. So although reason and logic can tell us how to achieve our goals, it doesn't tell us what those goals should be. We have to decide that together using our common human experience.

Sorry, this was a duplicate of the last one.

By logic I mean the process in the brain that should determine "ok, this hurts another person, it is wrong" or "gee, I made that persons' day a little better."

It's like a logical circuit in electronics, for example, where a diode decides "this current is trying to get through me the wrong way, I must stop it" or "this current is trying to go through me the right way, I will let it go." 

 It is illogical to cause harm to another living thing, with obvious exceptions. What is the gain? It is also unreasonable. So your arguments apply as well. We're both right. 

Thank you for your conciliatory tone. Of course, what you are saying is very reasonable. Humans have an inborn sense of right and wrong, which develops as we mature. In this sense, we are like 'pre-programmed' machines or +/- biased diodes, as you said. I guess what I'm trying to emphasize is that there's a difference between accepting what your 'heart' or your feelings tells you is wrong, and trying to logically decide what is wrong. The diode cannot logically decide what kind of bias to be (i.e., which direction it should let the current flow) any more than we can logically decide what we ought to do. That's all I was saying. Again, thank you for your considerations.