They ask how you can have morality without God, surely then, they say, anything goes? But it seems that the real question is how you can restrain morality without God? If, as others argue, morality is deducible from reason and science then when can you call it off, how can you prevent it from becoming unforgiving and tyrannical? Where is the irony in this all-pervading literalness? This is an old problem which has no easy solution either way. You would do away with morality altogether, perhaps as a form of dualism, but the idealist who denies the ultimate otherness of the other is in no better shape. There is no dialectical resolution that does not impoverish and betray experience.