That's a lot of words without making a single valid point. You write without understanding what you are saying. For example, you claim that "Peter Singer criticizes Humanism just the same way as Cockshaw, and calls it a human-centered "speciescism", a kind of racism." Pants on fire false. In a research of Singer I could not find anything that verifies this claim. In fact, in 2004, he was recognized as the Australian Humanist of the Year by the Council of Australian Humanist Societies. Not that I would want to tout Singer as an example of humanism either, given his approval of infanticide. Killing babies is not humanist, it is more Nazi, which Singer has been called.
It is clear that you have an even deeper level of misunderstanding of what humanism is as Cockshaw, but that doesn't prevent you from spouting off about it. Before pretending to be a philosopher, you should try and learn something about it first. "Please note that by lacking any organization to join to discuss and formulate a position on morality you speak only for yourself." I don't, I let humanists speak for themselves. If you want to criticize humanism, I suggest you access the same link I gave to Cockshaw. I know that the descriptions of humanism by avowed humanists does not agree with your sordid beliefs, but I trust them over your personal drivel.
Similarly, you equate atheists with existentialists (which you spell incorrectly - there is a spell checker in Medium, your writing is as lazy as your thinking). But as with humanism, you don't know what you're talking about. Atheists can be existentialists, or not, one does not define the other. Further, existentialism does NOT mean that "it does not matter what I do in this life" and NO, Sartre did not say that either (sorry, you don't earn points by aimless name dropping). The truth is just the opposite - existentialists believe that people form their own purpose and meaning in life. But that does not mean that they live alone in a vacuum away from society's moral values.
"Nothing is undisputed in the world of atheism when it comes to morality and ethics. And that is a problem. As a common understanding is needed for a society to live in peace." Again, just a nonsense statement off the top of your head, complete bullshit. Atheists lead as moral, or more moral, lives than people who derive their values from ancient Abrahamic texts. And we absolutely desire and promote a common understanding of morals and ethics, just not ones dictated to us by ancient Hebrew priests or religious cult leaders.
You want to believe in God, be my guest. I don't give a rat's ass what you believe. But don't try to force feed your "faith" on me, and stop pretending that you have this all worked out philosophically. You don't, your hubris notwithstanding.
