"Are you claiming that there is no objective morality (nothing that is intrinsically good or intrinsically bad REGARDLESS of anyone's opinions on the topic or the alleged consequences thereof)? Are you claiming that there is no objective reality (nothing that exists w/o any observers & REGARDLESS of what any observer(s) may think)?"

I claimed nothing other than that I subscribe to no gods, not of The Bible nor of scrolls nor any mythology.

"If, however, you deny objective morality & objective reality, I think you'll see that your thoughts are pretty meaningless & petty - after all, what does it matter if there's no reality & no morality? It's all arbitrary at that point."

Petty, you say? So those objective morals... Leviticus - the Literal Word of God. is absolute about Shrimp Cocktail, Poly-Cotton blends, and Beef Stroganoff. They are an abonination. Moses reiterates this in Numbers. Would you say the Literal Word of God constitute Objective Morals? We are expected to accept them as such.

"Even the most complex math depends upon the idea that 2 + 2 = 4 (some truth that we agree is true, but can't really be proven because 2 is simply defined to be that which, when added to itself, is that which we define as 4, and we agree this is real truth - not just consensus or tautology - because math works, it's real."

If I have Two Corn Flakes and you have Two Corn Flakes we could share a Feast of Four Cornflakes. Substitute #2 Phillips Screwdrivers for the Corn Flakes and you still get Four. Likewise with iguanas and Free Abelian Sets - the union of any two with any other two is four. We agree on that because, if we had to start every question about the nature of neutrinos with, "So 2+2=4 - OK? All right? *nods* Yes." then we'd have to cover Long Division and then Transendental Functions then Fourier Transforms ... and we'd never actually getting around to talking about massless particles. It would be like talking to Treebeard. Note, though, we don't merely _agree_ to that sum because of tradition or force feeding. Anywhere, by anybody. We can all deduce this for ourselves.

Yes, math is real.

"we need some god or we can't manage any higher thoughts."

*citation needed*

"Therefore, there must be some source of truth, which is your god, the thing you worship."

I am an atheist and reject the gods of all boo... Stop me if I've shared this already.

Just because you feel the need for gods in order for your life to have meaning, in order for you to be moral, then use gods for that purpose. Do not presume that we are all likewise seeking otherness or require the threat of Fire and Brimstone to convince that murder is evil.

"At some point, we all hit upon god; we're just fighting over which one(s)."

You've been careful about not capitalizing 'god' for reasons I find suspicious. I don't capitalize god because I do not see it as a proper noun but I think you're implying that you'd be open to the worship of many gods. I sincerely doubt that. Why would you wish to convince me that there are 'gods' when I don't even accept that a single one is real unless you have a favored god. And that's totally okay. It sounds like it works for you.

Do you believe in Ra the Sun God? Odin? Quetzacoatl? Me either. I merely go one god further.

--

Napoleon: You have written this huge book on the system of the world without once mentioning the author of the universe.

Laplace: Sire, I had no need of that hypothesis.