excreationist

Societies need to have rules so that people can work together effectively - and improve each other's quality of life. I think the conscience - a feeling that something is wrong or right - is partly taught to us... e.g. we could feel physically bad when we're thinking about doing the wrong thing because we were punished when we were young... this doesn't necessarily mean being spanked for misbehaving... it could involve privelleges being taken away. When a baby or toddler is very young they don't keep a linguistic memory of what's going on, because their linguistic skills aren't good enough - but they still are learning... and they also go through a stage where they learn that some things are "dirty" or "yucky"... (like germs)... maybe "morals" like homophobia are taught in a similar way. Also, people learn by observing others... so if they see a parent look disgusted or fearful at something, they can adopt that behaviour too.
I also think that empathy is partly hardcoded or instinctual. By that I mean we like to care for some things. And that doesn't necessarily include people. Our upbringings may cause us to hate everyone (or almost everyone) but we might still care for a pet - or care for our hobby of collecting something.
My beliefs are a bit different to Romans 2:14-15:
That statement about atheism sounds a bit dogmatic. Atheists just believe - or lack belief - in certain things - I wouldn't go so far as say they've "proven" or "disproven" (logically denounced) anything. About the earth being flat... it might go something like this:
1. the earth looks pretty flat. (P)
2. if the earth looks flat then it is flat. (P->Q)
Therefore the earth is flat. (Q)
The logic is "sound", but it turned out to give a false conclusion because the premises were flawed. For logical conclusions to be sound they need to be based on sound premises.

Some cultures have several creator-gods as well as other gods or spirits. They used them to explain how things were created and why they should be moral and also do as they're told by their leaders. Sometimes their stories involve the gods or spirits punishing people for their behaviour. And the gods and spirits can reward people too (in the afterlife, or by having a victorious battle or having a good harvest).

Infidelettante

Hi, Shadowy Man. I think you have touched on what underlies
the difficulty that theists and atheists have understanding
one another. Emotion! When I became a Christian at 16
it was the result of a deeply emotional event. That the event
was staged and executed for that very purpose only occured
to me 20 years later after I had learned a little about the
creation and performance of ritual.

I have never met a fundamentalist whose conversion did not
involve a highly emotional context. That emotional context
continues to color the fundamentalists world view through
out his religious life. The atheist who can't understand why
"they" can't underestand his logic and reasoning is at a loss
not because they are stupid but rather because they are
working from an emotional standpoint that his rational mind
finds hard to grasp.

They will not accept your reasoning no matter how beautifuly
presented. The rational will never penetrate because at the
root of the fundamentalists' faith is emotion, not logic, feeling,
not reason. If you read deconversion stories you will note
how many describe feelings of loss and betrayal. Anger and
fear. Just as the religious experiance began as and was
sustained by emotional tides so is the decoversion emotionaly
awash.

After we find our way out we may find logical reasons for leaving
the fold but in the beginging the journey to freedom begins because
the church no longer provides the emotional current it once did.
I suspect if we found some way to tap into that emotional stream
they inhabit we would see more of them coming over to our side.
Deep inside each knows he is trapped.

JT

ReasonableDoubt

A couple thoughts-

I don't think that logic was at fault when people thought the earth was flat. The problem was lack of facts, information. In fact, belief in a flat earth at the time was entirely logical.
If facts that have not been shown yet do indeed exist and are discovered, then, as a rational person, one would have to adjust one's beliefs.

The pluralistic view of God is curious to me. Basically it takes every religion's beliefs and says that they are all the same- all different paths to the same destination. When one actually examines the tenets of different religions, one can see that although many basic beliefs are similar, many are completely diametrically opposed to one another. I don't know how they could all be true manifestations of some essence.