HOW DO ATHEISTS/AGNOSTICS/NON-BELIEVERS DETERMINE RIGHT FROM WRONG?????

The people referenced in Rom 1, who hold the truth in unrighteousness, are backsliding, born again children of God. If we cannot see the possibility of ourselves, by our fleshly nature, in these scriptures, perhaps we are not as humble, as we ought to be.

The unregenerate, before he has been quickened by God, still has a heart of stone, that cannot be pricked, by God, to feel guilty of breaking one of God's spiritual laws. In regeneration God exchanges the heart of stone to a fleshy heart that can be pricked to feel guilty of breaking one of God's laws.

The different response of these two hearts, when being confronted with the accusation of crucifying Christ, is revealed in Acts 2:37 (the fleshy heart) and Acts 7:54. (the heart of stone).

If you WERE a real Athiest (most "Athiests" are just garden variety agnostics who don't really know anything), then nothing would matter, Good/Evil would have no meaning, and the only thing you'd have to be concerned about would be getting caught doing illegal stuff.

I am very careful in saying who is, and who is not, in pointing out who God's elect are, and are not. 2 Samuel 24:10 - And David's heart smote him after he had numbered the people, and David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done, and now I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant, for I have done very foolishly. God's punishment cost David the lives of seventy thousand men of Israel.

They neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him.

HOW DO ATHEISTS/AGNOSTICS/NON-BELIEVERS DETERMINE RIGHT FROM WRONG?????
free will

Yes, Christian values are important. These Christian sensibilities are written on heart and mind. They come from within and not without (although external things such as scripture and Church provide a lattice to aid in proper growth)

The sense of right and wrong is also written on heart and mind but social contract theory is often the vehicle for discerning the 'correctness' of choices made.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Social_contract

Because our original parents ate the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, we all inherit this knowledge which is our conscience. We are all born with the primary motivation of self but those that are born again have their motivation changed. Those that are not born again, continue in sin and become slaves to the flesh and the world. I'm not saying that they all become hardcore evil, just not good enough ( as 1 Cor 13 clearly states). The depth of a depraved mind could be unfathomable.

John the Beloved pinned a few times....
Joh 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

1Jn 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jn 2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Jer_17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

First - What's there to "discuss" about the "ideology"?! By the word - do you, as I suspect, mean more than biblical belief in Christ's sacrifice? As for "atheist's ideology", your concept of it is nonsense. I can't see anything to discuss.
Second - I would quite like to know your background re. Christianity as you have such views on the subject of atheist's ideology, 'though I suggest you don't overestimate the depth of my curiosity.
Would you like to state YOUR (while atheist) ideology - and - now we're on the subject - that of your atheist friends?

In the same way, the morality of a Society is what ensures its existence. it is an amoral people that do evil to others.

Okay as some other members here have mentioned, atheists are generally confused about their position and they fall into many language contradictions.
An atheist ideology says that everyone is free to live as they wish as long as it’s not Illegal. And legality changes from country to country.
‘This is in contradiction with their good morals though which is why I pick on my friends who defend this type of thinking.

When you say "Atheists are generally confused about their positions...", are you referring to their beliefs about there being no God, Christ not being the Savior, their innate sinfulness, etc., or something more?
I'm not sure what's meant by them "falling into many language contradictions".
I don't accept there is "an atheist ideology". Atheists have differing ideas about morality. Many if not most don't believe that it's OK if it's legal. Many things which are legal are immoral, even harmful to self and/ or others.
Would you now like to state the "atheist ideology" opinions of your erstwhile self and your current atheist friends? - particularly re. the idea of "pointless bags of cells" and meaninglessness?

Andrew I am not sure if you’re understanding me.

Atheists believe in self morals and as long as it’s not illegal.

Do you have a response for this or no? You can say many things like “I don’t agree“ or whatever you like.
Then as we progress in the discussion I will show you all the language fallacies too.

Simplistic and by no means universally true!

What a trite, incorrect, naive understanding.

I would say that based on my interactions with atheists, Bob Carabio is correct.

Sorry - I'm in a hurry. By all means repond - got to go bus!

this is the mindset of one who is Athiest and the argument they have formulated. 1. Order came out of Chaos 2. doing what is right is done because it is right 3. I am good because I have done nothing wrong to anyone 4. I was never taught right from wrong; I just knew it was.

That is a very big hypothesis to have. Remove God from the equation, can the results still be the same in moral relevance for a person who never taught about god? Can one be good to people and not be taught? The answer is no.

You would have to remove the fact of how you were raised, the society before you were born, and the rules or laws of the land. The culture, environment, and people must be taken into consideration. You did not just wake up and know slapping the hell out of someone was not the right thing to do. You learned it.

You found out it was wrong by being slapped yourself or receiving the repercussion of slapping another person. To deny that morality is taught and that one comes to the understanding of right and wrong and removes the truth, that it is learned by

1. seeing, hearing, and touching
2. the results of the action cause and effect
3. passed on from mother and father

is not being honest