I think the part that resonated most with me was how profound existential questions can be answered by orthodox (lowercase o) Christian theology. Note, I'm not giving a complete appraisal of the debate in this blog posting. What I am saying though, is that, very often in the debate, Singer would ask a question framed as "If a God exists than this..." or "Why would a God in the Judeo-Christian sense allow for this..."
Very specifically he asked D'souza why people lived morally before Christianity. To this D'souza gave the Christian answer, "because all people are stamped with the image of God." Now, I don't think Singer gave this argument much thought, seeing as how he already presumed the non-existence of God. But that was besides the point, the debate was about whether man can be moral without God, not on His existence. I don't think Singer gave a positive affirmation of morality without God other than saying the ways in which morality developed and why biologically it is ingrained in us.
Well, because something is ingrained and biological, doesn't make it absolute. If we are moral because we are helpless to do so, is it really morality?
-Steve K.
