I do not follow a "moral code", I follow a set of principles from which moral action can be derived. "Moral codes" are rules set by people who believe that everything can be cut down to black and white, right and wrong, good and evil on simple terms.

The Laws of Moses are a "code". Morality is not.

I don't really think about it.
I try to help people who need it and be fair in all my exchanges.

It's not a code, it's a compulsion.

The golden rule works for me.

My morals have not changed, generally don't hurt people.

The question assumes that until a person comes out as agnostic or atheist/a-theist then she follows a religious code of ethics.Suddenly, one day he decides that he is in fact a non-believer so for the first time must decide from where she will now get her moral principles.A non-question as for years I and many others have rejected religion as the basis on which we rest our ethical principles.Airing those views on a public platform thanks to the WWB heralds no change in how we treat others including animals.I was already a vegetarian prior to communicating my views to the world and view my fellow humans as deserving of respect without the need for a man made god to encourage me to love my neighbour for fear of eternal suffering if I do not.

Do no harm. If that's not an option, then do as little harm as possible. Pretty simple.

This has been really difficult for me because my morality as a religious person was based on a to do list. Do this, this, and this, and you are a good person. Do that, that, and that, and you are a bad person. Of course in my church there were sins of omission too, so you were also bad even if you didn't do anything either good or bad because you weren't doing the good list.

Good consisted of going to church and following church programs, and even if you dedicated your life to helping the poor you wouldn't have been considered good if you didn't also go to church and participate in all the church programs. Of course, by the time you did all those things, you had little time for anything else so you were pretty much damned if you did something as follows as help the poor.

I get the true good isn't based on a to do list and can be different things depending on different situations but I'm still working through the guilt of not doing the good list and doing some of the bad list (drinking coffee, gasp!) that I'm still struggling to know the difference. I don't feel "good" most of the time even though in my head I can understand that I'm a far better person now than I was. It's a huge challenge right now.

Do to others as you would have them do to you - seems to cover most things

My Moral code, be a Good Person, do NO Mental or Physical Hurt to others, Help others if Possible

I think the philosophy of someone like Matt Dillahunty (Athiest Experience) and the idea of well being is the way to go with this. Do whatever you want just so long as you do not harm anyone physically or mentally.

The "golden rule". Do onto others as you would have done onto youself. Treat others with respect ( untill you know better), do no harm.

I was raised a Christian, so the moral code I was taught was basically the Golden Rule. But the idea of doing unto others as you would have them do unto you is hardly exclusive to Christianity (or any other religion, really). It works just as well as a secular moral code.

I follow a moral code of risks. Are the risks worth it. For instance, If you know that someone is going to do something that is going to affect your health or lifestyle, then what would or could you do depending on the outcome. I look at all people as dying. This is it. The one life that we have. It makes you more compassionate towards others, and I feel sorry for other people because they cannot live their true lives. I don't bother with other people...words are just words...Now if someone was going to do something directly to me that is going to affect the short time I have, there may be some backlash. It would have to be something big, like robbery or violence. Boundary setting it important too. When you aren't religious, you don't have to prove yourself to anyone, organization or god. You can be who you want and say what you will. You have an opportunity to set boundaries, and ask yourself is this important. I don't waste my time getting into it with people, because that is not what I want to do with my life. You don't need a moral code, you just do what feels right or wrong to yourself. You look at all life as finite, so it allows you to avoid bullshit. Things just don't bother you as much when you know your dying and there is no afterlife, reincarnation or god.

Do anything you want as long as it harms no others, harm includes imposing against ones consent.

I have no codes or anything written down. It is safe to say that I follow a principal of do no harm.

False positive correlation: 1) only religious people are moral; 2) that morals are somehow are tied to religion; 3) agnostics and atheists are not capable of moral choice becsuse they are not religious.

Morals are more a cultural expression of a groups world view as to what type of behavior is the best to maintain the health of that culture.

So the default position is that only religion confers morality?

And there are other codes from which to choose to follow?

I follow my moral compass. You know, "harm nobody intentionally", "do your best not to be an asshole", "treat others well", and "don't follow religious teachings".

As has been stated by so many on here, religion doesn't have domain over the internal moral compass. Associating religion with morality is pious, pompous, reckless, and a sign of a doomed cult.

Moral code by theists is generally defined as that which pleases god. So for Christians that follow the bible: Slavery: Moral, Killing your daughter and burning her parts so god can enjoy the smell of her burning flesh, also moral. lots of examples - -

For me, that which produces the best outcome (least damage).

I have heard this question so often but each of the Abrahamic religions say they are superior to all others.
Is that a moral code ?.

My own moral code all that is required is empathy and a little common sense.

This is a question well worth considering.
My research upon quitting religion for agnosticism led me to choose as my first two advisories:

1. That most moral codes have a golden-type rule supports my having one like it.
2. That all religions but Tantra see sexuality as suspect supports my choosing Tantra.
   In time I added, 3) Do not needlessly attract the sheriff’s attention.

The exact same one as before...why do you think there would be any difference? Oh, wait, becuz yer pastor told you so.......

That sounds like a strange question for a Level 8 member to ask. The question contains a strange implication. I would be willing to answer a less presumptive question.

Basic rules:
Do unto others as you expects other to do unto you.
Do no unwarranted harm to others.