 ?
 
       ?   
 
   
   
 
Freedom2012,
You have selective  amnesia and only see or remember what you wish to do. All along the  discussion, you were talking about objective morality due to religion.  If you are now saying there are other kind of moralities (including  subjective), then you can't invoke the universality of its truthiness,  and thus you are against the morality from religion (it doesn’t  recognize other forms, including your esteemed William Lane Craig) whose  crutch (besides the wolf-in-a-sheep-skin tag of agnostic atheist) you  were holding and thus walked this far. Then you are talking about the  philosophical nature of morality rather than the theological nature of  morality. You chew on your own words and metamorphose whenever and  whatever suits you. As I observed, the only reason you are here is to  condescend atheist for their belief through your conceited and myopic  beliefs – full of inconsistencies and bigotry and you are in need of  constant validation of you belief. In process you even mentioned your  belief in miracle, afterlife - didn't you say you personally had a  miraculous incident and hence strenthened your unwavering belief in  higher power. If so, you can prayer harder for the deity to "surprise"  others as well.  
Not  only here, all over there have been discussion about religion and god,  morality and ethics etc, and they have been indecisive – precisely  because there is no sledgehammer (statements) to knuckle down the  contentious issues. That’s the reason we are still talking about it. But  that doesn’t mean you can effuse about the topic and shift shape at  every corner.
Here I have the silliest thought, and pardon my caustic and offensive propostion I call "The God Dilemma: if you are sodomized by a an invisible power, will you believe and tell it to others as a proof?” 
If you can, can you  give me a point to point answer to my question I had finely listed in an  earlier post, then I will meet you there. Until then, I don’t’ want to  discuss with a nincompoop who only has hubris but not an intellectual  capability and merit to partake in a discussion. 
