All sane people are horrified at the recent mass murders in Norway. This tragedy provides an opportunity for reflection on morality itself.
While we all condemn the acts of Anders Behring Breivik, we condemn them for reasons that differ according to our understanding of life, God, etc.
For example, Christianity teaches that killing innocent people is mortal sin. It's objectively wrong, independent of human judgement.
Atheism, of the materialist stripe, explains the moral sense of right and wrong as evolved adaptations, lacking objective reality. We are appalled at certain acts because we have evolved by natural selection (and kin selection, yada yada) certain social constraints that have helped us reproduce.
Atheism intriniscally lacks recourse to objective moral law, in the sense of moral law that exists independently of human beings and that would be objectively real and true even if all men disagreed.
I'm not saying that atheists don't feel moral law as strongly as Christians do. I'm saying that, despite the horror we all feel, atheist ideology provides no basis for asserting that the moral law is objectively true.
Atheism concludes that killing children in a summer camp is wrong only as a matter of opinion, and not wrong as a matter of objective fact independent of opinion.
So here's my question for atheists: was Breivik's slaughter of scores of innocent people last week objectively wrong, as opposed to a subjective adaptation, an evolved opinion?