Let’s at least get someone on the stand who can construct a decent argument. While I agree by and large that our society encourages moral baseness it certainly isn’t a moral framework rooted exclusively in religion. I do believe however that our currently accepted moral standards are undoubtedly influenced by religion in Western society to a certain degree. Historical necessity and convenience often leaves its mark regardless of religious involvement (it’s just that religion IS usually involved).

I think the work surrounding biological models, e.g. reciprocal altruism in animals, has a lot of fertile ground yet and will add perspective on the necessary formulation of a moral framework. Having said that, it is interesting to consider how these biological predispositions are appropriated or manifest in such complex and prevalent societal issues such as religion, especially considering the emphasis we as humans place upon interaction and dependency.

The adoption issue is a blatant example of religion breaking through at an applied level instead of simply being written down in a silly book by imaginary people, therefore, i oppose it naturally, in the same way I would oppose someone picking my pocket in the street.

The issue of moral standards has not yet been satisfactorily explained to me by the humanist community though. Most seem to completely disregard religion’s influence upon the morals we hold dear today in Western society - which is of course ridiculous.