system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I believe that, in the absence of a deity, there is no basis for human rights or morality. CMV.

I know that there are many people who don't believe in God, but believe in human rights. I would like to understand how and why. As a Christian, my belief in human rights comes from my belief that such rights are granted by God. In the absence of a God who decides what our rights are, I don't see a reason why such rights must exist. Here's my reasoning:

1. If there is no deity (or something outside of humanity which determines human rights and moral behavior), then there is no basis to make any sort of moral claim besides human reason and observation.
2. If we can only base our morality on human reason and observation, then morality (and human rights) cannot be objective, as there is disagreement among peoples. Furthermore, even if we all agree, it does not follow that any conclusion we may come to is correct.
3. Therefore, there is no basis for human rights or morality in the absence of a deity.
Going back to point 1. If you can give me something besides a deity which is outside of humanity which could decide what our rights are, then that would satisfy me, but I don't think that irreligious people have anything like that.

My main motivation for asking is that atheists typically believe in some sort of morality and certainly believe in human rights, but I can't tell if they believe in these things because to reject them is troubling or because they can actually articulate reasons why they exist.

Edit: People have been comparing moral truth to other kinds of truth, such as scientific truth. The problem with this comparison is that we assume scientific truth to exist independently of human reason and observation. For moral truth to be the same way, there must be an objective Good which is also independent of human reason and observation. My problem is that without a God I see no reason why this Good would exist.

Edit 2: To everyone bringing up Euthyphro's dilemma, I would say that it is a false dilemma. I can't speak for other theistic religions, but Christians hold that morality is a direct extension of God's nature. Suppose each being determines what is moral for himself. Humans are mutable and imperfect, and thus our morality will be mutable and imperfect. God is immutable, perfect, and the only necessary being, thus his morality will be immutable, perfect, and objective. Moral good is then an extension of who God is.
gpt
Take a schoolyard. If there is one kid who hits another kid, children will recognize that as a mean thing to do. 

They don't need a parent or adult to tell them that it is wrong. The bully might need an adult to tell them, but the victim and the other children don't.

Morality is created by men. We don't need a god to tell us to follow the Golden Rule. Every single culture and society that has ever existed has figured that one out. This is the basis of morality.

The definition as written on Wikipedia is: 

>Morality (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad"

The definition in Webster's dictionary is:

> beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior : the degree to which something is right and good : the moral goodness or badness of something

Neither of these definitions say that morality needs to be universally agreed upon. Morality doesn't have to be objective. Each person can have their own moral code. Subjective morality is morality nonetheless.