I do not believe that one can form a moral stand from merely physical or physiological sources. The atheist profiled in the article marches for women's rights, gay rights, animal rights and other causes, yet has no real reason to believe that the women, gays, or animals have any dignity at all. In fact, how can he even be sure that they exist? Because he sees them? Because he others tell him (or he thinks that they tell him) that women, gays, and animals exist and are in need of "rights"? What are rights?
All he has is his own perspective. He can call on nothing higher than his own intellect, so he really has no basis from which to form an argument. If I disagree with him he has nothing higher on which to depend.
The atheist in the article may be a loon, and he certainly seems to be, but he does not characterize all atheists. He may not have any reason to believe that people have diginity and rights, but other atheists do, and those reasons are based upon science, ie, knowledge of the physical universe.
All he has is his own perspective.
I have a few genuine questions, and I do not want to get into a religious argument/competition. Isn't your higher basis really based upon your own perspective of that higher power, or God? How do you know that these principles are the commands of God, other than by your own reasoning and perspective? Does God speak these commands to you, either directly or indirectly, and how can I know, in truth, that God has spoken to you? What empirical evidence may be presented to me to suggest that your reasoning is correct?