I am religious but I don't believe that Godlessness = lack of morality. I do think religion gives people a good set of guidelines to live by (teaches not to steal, kill, lie, commit adultery, etc.) that atheists are missing but I don't think that means atheists are bad people or don't have morales. I know a few people who consider themselves christians but choose to ignore the bible and do things like shoplift, lie/gossip, cheat, etc.

Human thinking has an emotional component involved with it.  That is how humans thing, PARTICULARLY in the area of values, which an ethical system is based.  People feel certain ways towards things, so they have values pro or con towards things.  And the stronger they value something, the stronger the emotions are towards these.  The inverse is also true, in that something is of greater value, because they have stronger emotions associated with them.  This is why you see in forums where religion, politics, videogames, or anything of value, emotions get heated.  There is every reason why emotions get factored into a system of ethics.  Now, does this mean that an ethical system shouldn't temper emotions?  No, it should serve this purpose of correcting and calling people on things.

Also, I will say, a flawed ethical system applied, and tempered with practical experience will produce better results then someone not operating under ANY ethical system, or a group which has NO agreed to standards of conduct.  A flawed vehicle will still can get you somewhere.

@richardhutnik:

Human thinking has an emotional component involved with it.

A component which certainly isn't/shouldn't be dominant.

People feel certain ways towards things, so they have values pro or con towards things.

Aren't pros and cons established through logic?

This is why you see in forums where religion, politics, videogames, or anything of value, emotions get heated.

In a way I kinda think the World State in Brave New World did an excellent job by eliminating all those things you mentioned from society (well video games didn't exist there FTR).

A flawed vehicle will still can get you somewhere.

A flawed vehicle can get you killed.

You think the World State of "Brave New World" is a good one to emulate?  The world is considered as a dystopia and written as a warning:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World

An entertaining action film remake (or at least inspired by) of that story is Demolition Man.  I would recommend looking up more on Brave New World, if you question my saying it is NOT a good society to emulate.

In regards to pros and cons, there is the case of personal preference, which are valued, but are beyond logic and determined from experience and the feelings they generate.  Logic can help prioritize the values, once you have them, but you can't get them from logic.  Logic is a system based upon the use of verbal and written communications.  This sufficient is incomplete for effectively communicating and understanding existence and the human experience.

I personally drive a vehicle with a number of flaws with it, due to mileage, and it gets me places.  It depends on the flaws.  What can get you killed also is not going anywhere, or knowing where you are going to go.  It depends on where the flaws are.  Also, a perfect ethical system, with perfect enforcement of the ethics to insure that they are complied with, could also get someone killed to. 

Ethics and morals are something that comes from rationalism and from genuine belief. If anything, many religious people don't have any morals because they just follow religious rules blindly without internalizing any morals or ethics.

Anyone who says atheists don't have any morals is severely mentally retarded.

Have you looked at 100% of the sky? Could those of us not making observations through telescopes day in and day out even know for certain that there isn't an entire ecosystem of perpetually airborne creatures flying around up there? Nope.

Your post didn't add anything other than anecdotal evidence of what you call immorality in atheists. I could only be led to assume that this was the point you were trying to make.

Even in the post you just wrote you say that your statements meant nothing and then turn around and defend them as opinion.

What religion says he lives in the clouds? Well mine does. I just made it 2 seconds ago, didn't you hear? I've gotten a few thousand people to believe me already. Can I start collecting money yet?

The problem with saying that religion gives you moral guidelines is that the people propogating that religion could choose whatever guidelines they wanted their followers to believe, and teach them those exclusively. This leads to a potentially skewed vision of the world. Teach a child logic and they can find morals themselves.

@richardhutnik:

You think the World State of "Brave New World" is a good one to emulate?  The world is considered as a dystopia and written as a warning:

I've read Brave New World, and I know what the author intended, but objectively speaking the society did have some positive elements. It's not a nightmaire society, like that of Nineteen Eighty-Four.

In regards to pros and cons, there is the case of personal preference, which are valued, but are beyond logic and determined from experience and the feelings they generate.  Logic can help prioritize the values, once you have them, but you can't get them from logic.  Logic is a system based upon the use of verbal and written communications.  This sufficient is incomplete for effectively communicating and understanding existence and the human experience.

Personal preference may matter on an individual level, but when you're creating an ethical/moral system that should be followed by everyone you have to think of the values which are truly important, and which ones should be left to be decided on an individual level by each individual, and that's when logic and ration come in.

Also, a perfect ethical system, with perfect enforcement of the ethics to insure that they are complied with, could also get someone killed to.

Well if the "perfect" ethical system requires methods of coercion that could end up killing someone, then it's not very perfect now, is it?