From nature and nurture. It is one of looking to a preservation of our species. Some religions have a concept of Agape love ( [gotquestions.org] ). This is basically a sense of altruism. Agape love cannot be had under a religious format. Religious morality is based on the idea of rewards and punishment and is egocentric. Ask the person what drives their morality? Is it fear (of a hell) or greed (heaven)? If it is self-serving it is not true morality.

From within, I do the right thing without any expectation of a reward in a havean or the fear of punisment in hell.

From Kant, obviously.

Kidding. There are plenty of places to derive morality from. There are the utilitarian folks, there's the people who believe that laws and rules are correct insofar as they're followed by the majority, either from some moral framework (like said utilitarianism) or from intuition. There are people who believe in a more "What I believe is morally correct, is". Which sounds bad but more often than not tends to follow the majority belief structure.

Finally there are people that believe a moral framework exists in and of itself, aka not a construct. This is definitely more of an intuition based system. It's hard to really qualify because it changes from person to person, but there's definitely common ground. It's easier for people to argue / debate with religious folks as well, because belief in an inherent good and evil is not that dissimilar to a belief in a god.

Either way, the majority of people believe in very similar rules across the board, so it's really not hard to think it comes from a source other than religion.

On the other hand, people believing that god dictates morality often run into the same conclusion. I mean the most basics objections to divine command is that if something is good solely because god says its good, it means that A) its subject to change at a moments notice. All of a sudden kicking puppies is morally acceptable. That's a bit hard to swallow. Option B: If something is not morally acceptable just based on God, that means god gets his answers somewhere else. Aka the previously mentioned options.

It's a stupid question and you should relay that to anyone who asks it. Just because there are moral lessons (good and bad) in (all) religious cultures in no way does that imply those same lessons are absent outside of those cultures. To suggest that is arrogant and ignorant and plain stupid. The key word here is culture. I believe you create your own morals from what you learn from, and how you personally react to your surrounding culture, local, national and international.

I always felt Christians have a very scratch the surface idea of right and wrong. Secular morality is far reaching. I take morality seriously as an agnostic. Many atheist agnostics and believers don't. It's really a individual thing.

This is one of those questions that really gets me irritated. I've been asked multiple times since I came out as an atheist where I get my morals from.

First of all: Asking an atheist where they get their morals from is just flat out insulting. We get our morals from being social creatures. We literally evolved this way. Asking a person where they get their morals from is akin to saying, "I don't think of you as human so how do you think?"

Second: This question actually shows more about the character of the person asking the question than it does the person being asked. It basically means that they need that imaginary big brother looking over their shoulder with the promise of a reward or the threat of torment to be good people. I'm a good person by choice because it makes my life and the lives of those I care about easier.

Being a good person is a daily choice. We can choose our actions and reactions.

You don’t need religion to know right from wrong.

It comes from within. I don't need church or a fictional book to tell me how to be a good person.

There is the golden rule: do unto others as you would have done to you. In case you like to be spanked, there is the platinum rule: find out how a person wants to be treated and do your best to treat them that way. Also, I have developed as a member of a social species - I need others - at least one other - to be fulfilled. So, I do not engage in anti-social behavior because my life and my happiness depend on peaceful and productive engagement with others. Morality is not really required and in fact often gets in the way of good behavior. Steven Weinberg, a renowned physicist, famously said - and I agree - that... “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”

I typically say something along the lines of...
I believe in a secular morality, based on the good/needs of of every individual balanced by the good/needs of society. Personally, I judge my actions based on asking myself if my actions will harm others in any way. (ie: I wouldn’t want to be hurt or killed, so I won’t do it to someone else.

A lot of folks (mostly Christians) don’t even realize that there were many functioning societies prior to the Bible being written. They did not need “rules” taught by an ancient book then, and we still don’t now; Especially when you consider how much immorality is spewed from the Bible.

Morality is an inner thing. It emanates from withing yourself. No religion or the lack thereof is required.

Theology, in my view, is better at teaching immorality than morality; particularly a form of morality superior to Nature's. But for introduction via 'commandments' we wouldn't display the behaviors prohibited by them in the first place. they first teach what 'sin is and go on to prohibit it with threats of terrifying consequences to reinforce their fear-based superstitions.

We see attributes of morality demonstrated by creatures that are less developed than ourselves, so a logical expectation is that we are at least as moral and possibly more so. Animals show boundless loyalty, selfless affection and love, courageous protective actions, respect for and integration with humans spontaneously.

They need no religious training or externally imposed commandments. Morality and capacity for love are instinctual and theological fanaticism is as anti-instinct and anti-life and natural love as it gets on this planet.

I have been in the Military for 27 years, and I have embraced the Military Morals and values of Loyalty, duty, respect, Selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage. These are the values that we all strive to succeed in, regardless of our religion or lack there of.

You mean like the child molester youth pastor, or the Deacon who's banging the youth pastors wife? Morals like that no thanks. I'm being sarcastic but everyone has morals and values. Some people just choose to ignore them

Most of it came from how my parents raised me. In general, be kind to others, treat people with respect, your are responsible for your actions, don't hurt others, don't lie, steal, cheat, etc. The only biblical part is the golden rule. Treat people how you would like to be treated.

Big subject. Matt Dillahunty Does a great job here.