Well, you can base your morals on philosophers of ethics, choosing which moral theory fits you better (personally, I'm prefer deontologism over consequentialism for most things, but use the second for things the first cannot give an answer to). You can read about Kant, John Stuart Mills for classical authors, and there are plenty of interesting contemporary authors too! As for the people who say you have no morals, just tell them that you do good because you WANT to, not because you're afraid to be punished for not doing it, that should shut up most of them.

One does not need to be religious in order to be a moral or good person. In fact, many highly religious folks are neither moral , or good ! Some of the most horrendous events on earth have been perpetrated in the name of religion.

If you feel solid in your beliefs, stick to your own path, and listen not, to those who would disparage you !

morals and religion are 2 different animals. MY definition of morals is to treat your fellow human with kindness, compassion and empathy. In doing that you harm no one. Religion is out the window on the discussion of morals in my world.

I've encountered too many alleged "Christians" and "Muslims" (and seen many more in public life) who claim that their religion gives them a superior morality, but commit what I consider immoral acts daily. Most often, religion is used as an excuse for immoral actions against the out-group that doesn't share the same religion- and this goes back to the roots of Judeo-Christian-Islamic religion, in which "God" chose one group to be superior to all others. The smugness inherent in being the "chosen people" has nothing to do with morality, instead it's an excuse to avoid examining one's own morality: an assumption that if God is on your side, your actions are automatically moral. Even if you're committing murder in the name of God.

Jesus said that Christians should love their enemies. Very few Christians live by this code. Most pray for victory over their enemies, not for strength to endure their troubles. Christianity, like Islam, is largely practiced as a warrior religion.

My own self-derived moral code is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". (I borrowed the wording, but I came up with the sentiment myself.) Violence is unacceptable except in self-defense or the defense of others. Nothing is forbidden between consenting adults of sound mind. I help others when I'm able to help. I accept full responsibility for my actions.

Now, you won't find that in any bible, but I think it's a better and more moral way to live than by foisting responsibility and blame on an invisible alpha male and his invisible enemy living in some fiery pit.

I consider myself a better "Christian" (even though I am non-theist) than many "Christians" in my life. I am a transplant in the Deep South so it is difficult for me.
If we need to fear eternal damnation in order to be "good" then we have bigger problems. I try to be good because I actually believe in "do unto others" without a man in the sky making a list and checking it twice.
Be the best you you can be and take no heed to those who will judge. They are not living the word of their Christ.
I have never walked in another's shoes so I cannot even begin to determine another's motives. I can choose to remove toxic people from my life because it is bad for me.

Penn Jillette has a great response to this accusation.

<blockquote class="imgur-embed-pub" lang="en" data-id="a/cYExI"><a href="//imgur.com/cYExI"></a></blockquote><script async src="//s.imgur.com/min/embed.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It's the opposite. I tend to find that atheists have better morals than the religious as they tend to judge and pity others less. They take action rather than relying on meaningless statements like quoting the buybull or saying 'I'll pray for you'. Atheists actually think about what it means to be moral, where as the religious just follow whatever their preacher or book says, leading to many of the most immoral outrages known to man for certainly the last 2,000 years. It is laughable that the religious think they own the moral high ground due to their own sanctimonious dogma. You only have to look at the christian evangelicals supporting Trump to realize just how hypocritical and mendacious their religions are. They are all about profits not prophets.

You don't need religion to have morals and values. Those come from within each person. Religion isn't going to change how a person reacts or behaves if they don't have a conscience and know right from wrong. What determines good from bad is based on whats right to one compared to wrong from the next person. Common sense and moral judgement is what makes us who we are.

Religious persons are taught they can commit all kinds of sins, but if they confess, then they can think of themselves as good persons. So they sin over and over again, knowing they can confess and then feel good about themselves.

Atheists, in order to feel good about themselves, generally don't commit "sins" in the first place.

So, who is more moral? Teh repeititve sinner, or th e one who simply refrains?