Come, let us reason together—not from tradition, opinion, or emotion, but purely from first principles and the definitions of the words themselves.


God means intentionality. Thus, the alternative to God is non-intentionality. Non-intentionality, by definition, means there is no objective standard because there was no one to create it. No objective standard, no objective right or wrong. This makes morals subjective. If morals are subjective, they are, by definition, not binding. If they are not binding, then you must accept that everything is permitted. You cannot say that someone else's values are right or wrong, or their actions are good or evil, for who made you the judge of the world?

If we are talking purely from observation of existence and reality itself, using logic, without a creator or an objective standard, there is no binding force to anything you believe. Saying that someone should follow your non-binding subjective human rules makes you hypocritical and inconsistent. You are arguing purely from emotion, not from logic. If there is no one to judge, there is no judgment. Without judgment, there is no consequence. And without consequence, what is it exactly that is holding you back?