Why would an atheist call women slvts for having sex outside of marriage?

What gives an atheist the authority to claim moral superiority over those who choose to engage in sex outside of marriage? Aren't most criteria of morality, except in cases where others are hurt, mostly arbitrary in the absence of a belief in God?

Religious people get their belief in abstinence from their faith; they believe that God's word is moral, and God calls for people to abstain from sex until marriage. So it makes sense that they would view the notion that sex outside of marriage is wrong as reflective of ultimate, indisputable truth.

However, atheists obviously have no such beliefs, so how can one logically tell those who choose to participate in pre-marital sex that they are dirty, no good, disgusting whores who lack any semblance of morality?

I just always find it funny when atheists like Arlo think they're ABSOLUTELY RIGHT that any woman who doesn't save her virginity for marriage is a slvt whilst rejecting the origin of this mindset. The fact that one says "Women are supposed to save virginity for their husbands" means absolutely nothing in and of itself.
No I'm not; we have a number of atheist and agnostic posters who slvt shame non-virgins.
 
Back
Top