Without God, there is no morals

Pro Starts off this round agreeing that his definition of "God" is vague. Pro has up to this point failed to explain how an all-powerful being must be the source of morals. Pro has not shown this all powerful being to exist either. So far all I can see of Pro's argument is circular reasoning that morality is from a god, and we know this because we in general think killing lying and stealing is wrong. Pro falsely summarizes my position as "You have stated that with internal education and self empathy does someone find morals." I did not state any adjectives to modify education or empathy, nor did I suggest that education was of an independent study nature. Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. I have no clue what Pro means by self empathy? What is it? Is it the ability to understand and share the feelings of oneself, if so then it is just called feelings? If Pro were to think killing children who he believes are practicing the dark arts is right, it is likely that barring a third party convincing Pro of his error that Pro would think his actions moral along with those that agree with Pro. If Pro was part of a majority then by Pro's first round comment "Society is based on the largest accepted moral system of it contributors and/or rulers." negates the idea in his last round that everyone making their own morals would make it hard for justice to exist. But justice is not morality. "If everyone does what is moral to them, than who can say it is wrong." This is a good question, Pro. I will address it in the next few paragraphs "No one is an unjust villain in his own mind. Even - perhaps even especially - those who are the worst of us. Some of the cruelest tyrants in history were motivated by noble ideals, or made choices that they would call 'hard but necessary steps' for the good of their nation. We're all the hero of our own story." ~~Jim Butcher [1] "If I decide to kill someone, who can say that is wrong if I have my morals and they have theirs." Pro, you could, if you learn that your reasons for killing are misguided. Pro has yet to meet his BoP for the claim that morality must only come from a god figure, with the property of omnipotence. Sadly Pro failed to answer my questions: ~~~~~~ Now I must ask this god from which Pro asserts that morals come from, can it interact in human affairs? Does it? The anemic definition of "God" notes only that it is all powerful, how does power equate to morality? Is the god Pro asserts as the giver of morals also moral? One last question for Pro, given the definitions of "right" and "wrong" is it possible that a singular action can be both?" ~~~~~~ On the last question I note the folk hero Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor. Was his actions moral or immoral? As I see it the answer depends on where one views this problem. If stealing is wrong then why is this thief seen as a hero? Unless morality originates in the self by means of education and empathy. The post limit is 8,000. I ask that if Pro has the space to please answer the questions I have restated from R2. Pro I ask that you stop asking questions of the nature "If I told you I was going to kill you, who has the right to say that I am wrong to say that." As I have noted it depends on the situation. If I entered your house in the middle of the night armed and you told me you were going to kill me and then you did after I failed to flee, you would be hard pressed to find someone to say what you did was immoral. The reason people would see your actions as moral is because of empathy and education. Now make me a cop who identifies himself as such and suddenly the morally justified action is much more murky. Again this is due to empathy and education. [1]http://www.goodreads.com...