Can atheists provide an objective basis for right and wrong independent of cultural pressure or personal preference? If so, what is it?

Atheists can only account for subjective moral values. For something to be objective it requires a ruling authority that cannot be contradicted.

Atheists are forced to believe that our sense of objective moral values is just that: a sense created by our evolved mind and therefore an illusion. But that in itself is self refuting. The word objective means something is true despite what any one individual might think. Example: If the human race were extinct; would murder still be wrong? Answer: yes because morality isnt dependent on the subjects only the object which is God.

Hmmm.

No , I cannot provide objective basis for morality that is independent of Culture. Honest, I don’t think you can either.

P.s. why not? Did you know that the greatest example of gene-culture coevolution is the size of our brain? It almost tripled in size in six million years. Not just by random accident, but accelerated by cultural inventions like campfires, empathy and altruism for group members, even empathy for other groups. We learned to get along. We formed larger groups, and began eating a lot of meat. Unlike our habiline ancestors who trouped in smaller groups eating plants and insects.

So the brain evolved as our culture evolved.

“Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it.” ~~ Christopher Hitchens

Objectively, the universe doesn't care what we do, but the nature of evolution is survival and that alone leads to a form of rightness that has allowed us over time to develop models that seem to be leading the world in the right direction (albeit slowly). At any rate, people tend to be living longer, have greater access to sources of pleasure, and are freer to express themselves than they once were. So, right and wrong are part of survival of the species, and at times both atheists and religious folk get it wrong and at times they get it right.

Can theists provide a specific condemnation of slavery, genocide, infanticide, or rape from the bible. Since the bible doesn't condemn these evil acts but condones all of these immoralities why should anyone with a brain regard the bible as a moral guide?

Human beings evolved traits such as basic fairness and empathy because as a social species it is necessary to maximize our survival, that is basic evolution by natural selection.

There is no need to believe in a god to be moral or ethical.

Morality not only pre-dates religion. Morality predates humans.

-Right and wrong, “morality”, predates humans and religion.

Altruism and empathy, a survival mechanism, was essential to the evolution of humankind. Feral carnivores, wolves, display altruism and empathy along with chastising behavior that is not beneficial to the group.

Morality, Good and Evil are Human concepts. The business known as Religion gathers it all together, neatly packages it and sells it to society as if society was incapable of discerning right from wrong. Evil combined with Sin is the meal ticket for the clergy.

Atheists can't even prove they are Atheists let alone anything else.

God has shown sufficient to all, so what is it they are denying?

There are ethical theories, like utilitarianism, that do not rely on, or require, any sort of God concept. I am personally a utilitarian, although I'm no longer an atheist. And basically, it is a form of consequentialist ethics that focuses on the OUTCOMES of any given action, and propagates choosing whatever action leads to the least amount of suffering, and the greatest amount of happiness/well-being, overall! And if we agree on that being a reasonable goal..? There are certain actions that are OBJECTIVELY better than others! Like.. saving a child from a burning car will OBJECTIVELY lead to more happiness and less suffering than just leaving it there to die! Although of course there are still ethical concerns one could debate, and such. (Like for instance: should we count the lives and suffering / well-being of other animals as being equally important to those of humans? What do we do when it's not possible to easily determine what's the best course of action, in any given situation? Suffering can be difficult to quantify. Etc..) Not to mention, people might not always manage to live up to those ideals. Because selfishness and hypocrisy... :-P But I do still think it's something worth striving for, regardless! :)

There are also other ethical theories, like deontology, virtue ethics, etc.. All of them require that you accept a certain premise, I'd say. (Like: agreeing that preventing suffering should be the overall goal, in the case of utilitarianism.) But once you accept that..? Certain actions are, indeed, objectively better than others!

Same with theistically based morality, really... You've got to first accept this sort of dubious premise that this EXACT kind of God exists, and that he/she/it somehow wants you to follow EXACTLY these rules! For whatever arbitrary reason... But once you accept it, you've got what YOU consider to be objective morality.. Except often, it is deeply and heinously immoral, as least the way I perceive it, based on my own utilitarian moral compass!

Not to mention, there's this great argument I came across during my atheist years, that I still very much agree with to this day.. Namely that any sort of theistically based morality, even if the god it is based on CAN be proven to exist, beyond any shadow of a doubt, (which it can't, anyway), that STILL does not make it "objective morality"! Because said god is itself a subjective entity, with its own personal agenda! It is just one step up from letting us humans determine things, based on our own subjective, personal agendas... Just like, letting politicians create legislation does not make said legislation OBJECTIVELY right, or free of an agenda! It's just putting it in the hands of a higher institution than the average layperson.. That you may or may not respect, depending on your perspective. (I know personally, I remain mostly unimpressed by such supposed authorities.)

Well kid...It certainly doesnt emanate from an archaic fairy tale about an invisible man in the clouds.

That would just be stupid.

No. For a start atheism is the disbelief in gods, nothing more, nothing less. As your question has nothing to do with the belief/disbelief in gods it has nothing to do with atheists.

Right and wrong, good and bad come under the banner of morals and ethics and these are determined by the society we live in. Humans are gregarious, we like to live together in groups. To do so peacefully we need rules and these are the morals and ethics. The rules are much the same regardless of what gods are believed in and also where no gods are believed in. Morals and ethics do not come from gods and religions.

Gods are invented to explain the unknown and religions are invented to serve the gods and to control the people. We have morals and ethics despite religions not because of them.