I appreciate the feedback that I have gotten from the many who answered the question about morality. Morality is a human creation. Our species learned that killing , raping, and pillaging would not lead to survival. We learned that to have a sustainable society, we had to develop rules and a social contract. Religion also became a useful tool to control and maintain an orderly society. Why would an atheist be a moral person and not nihilistic? I think it relates to empathy. We genuinely care about people. Our empathy cannot be attributed to a supernatural element, since other species display empathy and sympathy Also, the pressures of society and its moral codes keep us in line. Just because we know there is no hell, we are not going to shoot someone. We love our incomes and comfort.The choice of punishment for such a crime is too much to pay. We have a need to be loved and respected, so we will naturally follow the " golden rule." in order to br accepted in society. So why remain moral as an atheist? There are many reasons. Not one is supernatural. I believe that the reality that this life is all we have is an impetus to be a person who brings good to a society We actually see life as precious. We don't have eternity, so the need to show love and appreciation to our fellow man is even greater. Just because we don't have Jeeesus doesn't mean we are scum of the earth. Quite the contrary.
s

My buddhist father has more morals than any Christians I know. There was a survey that I read, Christians are the most amoral people. To me, Moral is a part of me and the responsibility rest on me. Whereas, Christian morals rest outside of themselves and on an invisible old man who always conveniently forgives their trespass.

I think the impulse to morality comes from the same two places just about every other human behavior comes from; nature and nurture. An evolutionary adaptation, shaped and colored by culture. Instead of morality coming from religion, I think religion comes from morality (but needs to be updated more often than every two thousand years).

When the religious indoctrinated ask me that question I tell them to answer this first. If your god told you to kill your child would you? They always reply, of course not! I then say, "you already have a higher moral belief than the god you purport to believe in." Now you have my answer.

I've never been asked this question outright, but here's my response:

I think about my actions and their consequences, whether they are helpful or harmful, if there's a better way, and so forth. The measure of an action's morality is, for me, a direct expression of its impact on the wellbeing of sentient life. I don't consider the moral mandates of religion to be valid because accepting anything on authority, never reflecting on the practical implications of benefit and harm, leaves the door open to causing great harm. I know the argument is often made that nonbelievers have a subjective morality, but it seems far less subjective to have a clear goal (i.e., sentient wellbeing) than to follow the decrees that change based upon religion, region, and era. If religion had an objective morality, there wouldn't be such disparity between different religions and even within religions (e.g., the various Christian denominations and Islamic sects). Religion may have rigid rules, but it's terribly subjective.

I move in the direction of existential philosophy. We are all responsible for all of our choices and actions -- and their consequences -- as we could always have chosen otherwise. The choice is ours; therefore, so is the responsibility. The basis: the concept of minimum violation of human dignity and respect.

Morality is no doubt man made. I agree.