Do Atheists believe in moral absolutes?

I think most of us atheists just believe morality is evolutionary.

E.g. These civilisations that did not consider murder kind of unappealing couldn't function properly and died out long ago. Also, look at piranhas. They appear to have morality because they never harm each other. But it's not absolute, it's just evolution.

No one has ever seen a perfect circle, nor a perfectly straight line, yet everyone knows what a circle and a straight line are. Perceived circles or lines are not exactly circular or straight, and true circles and lines could never be detected since by definition they are sets of infinitely small points. But if the perfect ones were not real, how could they direct the manufacturer?

What's are your set of moral absolute or standard of beauty down inside your heart and they the same as mine???

Doesn't that depend on the individual? Atheists do not have a book that tells us what is right and what is wrong. I do not believe in moral absolutes - life is complicated and requires thought not absolutes.

no, there's no moral absolutes morality has changed throughout history. And even in the same time period, what's considered moral differs from one community to another

If you believe otherwise, can you give me your best example of a moral that you consider to be absolute, and I guarantee I can show you it's not

No, I do not.

The closest I would come to a moral absolute would be, "Take no action that unjustly imposes upon the ability of another sentient being from taking the action they desire." I cannot think of any instance in which this rule would not apply -but that does not mean there is no such instance.

A moral absolute is the neurochemical reaction phenotype that is most frequent in the population.

Different Atheists have different morals. We are not all the same. In fact, the only thing we all agree on is "There is no god".

No, absolute moral regulations do not exist. human beings, mutually and in my opinion are to blame for determining what's ideal and incorrect. "If someone with adequate means exceeded off to love rape and molestation, what excellent ought to we ought to impose our morality on him?" the right to act, similar as in the different difficulty. "What must be incorrect with the guy, or society, with the means implementing their morality on you?" not some thing. It honestly takes position today and that i manage it. "Why can we condemn the Nazi society for following their self-imposed morals?" because we don't love their morals. "Why did the Nazi society not have the right to break from the custom of morality in western civilizations?" They did have the right. they merely did not have the means. can not make experience of the subsequent bit :S And rape is faulty because I say it is incorrect. it is my personal selection, it merely takes position that many, many human beings accept as true with me in this subject. If it were truly incorrect nonetheless, it would not ensue in any respect, notwithstanding it does, so it is merely somewhat incorrect. someone someplace both thinks it is excellent, or can justify it in some opposite direction. And their opinion concerns merely as a lot as yours or mine, regrettably.

Not usually. Most atheists are of higher intellect and people of higher intellect believe that morals aren't absolute. Morals are situational. What might be right in one situation might be wrong in another situation.

Not quite.

I believe there ARE things, ideas and actions, where you'd find it very hard to locate someone who said "these things are not bad," but until we've asked everyone on the planet, we cannot say that said action was objectively immoral.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

our sense of right from wrong is no different.