Peter wrote:
"Who are you to define what is "good" and what isn't?  You have no reason to say anything is good or bad.  To use CV's favorite phrase--you are stealing the concept of morality from religion."
 
Peter, this is NOT what the fallacy of the stolen concept means. I have explained this numerous times now, and I've provided links to several online articles which define the nature of this error and give examples to show it in action. You have not understood a great bulk of my criticisms if you think what you say above reflects the proper understanding of the error in question. If that's the case, then what's been said to you has been lost on you. Slow down, and be willing to think things through a little more carefully. I think Len is right when he says that you demonstrate some ability of value, but I think you react in haste as a matter of habit. It's not bad to be wrong. But it's certainly not good to continue to be wrong when corrections have been offered.
 
Furthermore, morality is a human concept, and it is not the exclusive property of religion. Morality is a human need, not a religious bauble. Any philosophy which is supposed to be fit for man will have to address basic moral questions and offer fundamental moral principles. The idea that a non-believer is "stealing" morality from religion is simply ridiculous.
 
CertainVerdict