you cannot have morality outside of creationism

Ok I excuse my self for not writing an argument last round. So This is what I have to do no matter in which order to complete my burden. 1-Proof that morality can only come from creation with purpose. 2-Proof that purpose can only come from the divine. Proof for number 1 I have to proof that morality can only come from creation with purpose. Most of the problems that came from me attempting to proof this point came from my analogy. I will try to explain this in a more effective way. So for me to proof this we have to assume that humans have the capacity to put purpose into their creations (only to proof this point). So picture his. A hundred years from now humans have mastered the genes and are able to create new species all together. So now they create a chicken than is supposed to produce three times more eggs than any chicken on earth before . But after the humans create this creature with a purpose in mind the chicken doesn"t give any eggs. Now let"s lock at the definition of morality: -Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. Did the chicken act right or wrong? The chicken acted wrong because she didn"t lay eggs. The chicken defied it"s purpose . between right and wrong or good Did the chicken behave right or wrong ? No the chicken didn"t act as it was suppose to. wrong or good and bad behavior. Why did the chicken not behave like it was suppose to? It didn"t lay any eggs . IT DEFIED IT"S PURPOSE. Now let"s lock at another example : The chicken wasn"t created with a purpose in mind it got created trough evolution. No one can claim the chicken is behaving wrong or that the chicken is acting wrong. Why? Because the chicken has not been created with a purpose in mind So now I hope to have proven that morality can only come trough creation with purpose. But now I have to proof that Creation with purpose can only come from a divine agency. Proof of why creation with purpose can only come from a divine agency 1.Everything follows physic"s rules(new rules may be discovered to explain the previously un-explained) 2.Something that doesn"t follow those rules cannot be explained by science. 3.Some thing that cannot be explained by science is considered a miracle. 4.Miracles are attributed to the divine. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... 1.Our minds can put purpose into things because they cannot be predicted by sciences rules. No. We cannot explain consciousness and thoughts using chemical reactions, and so Pro cannot claim that the Mind is just chemical reactions in the brain. I myself adopt the atheistic world-view of Thomas Nagel in his book Mind and Cosmos, where he uses Descartes' argument which basically says that the fact that we can imagine mind without body means that mind, to some extent, is separate from the physical body[1]. it is necessary for Pro to establish the premise "mind is just chemical reactions" as a factual premise to be used in a deductive logical argument. If he doesn't, he is simply making a baseless assertion. If something cannot be explained by science it enters the miracle category. Definition of miracle: An extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency. So if minds cannot be explained by science they enter the miracle category and so when something is created by a mind it"s divine creation . 2.Our we can go back to the premise of the previous round and say morality can only come from something non-physical. Something physical enters the miracle category and as such purpose can only come from the divine. Basiclly you can understand the mind or you cannot. No matter one or two it"s a win for me.