Sheer nonsense.
Simply put, you sacrifice logic to propound your hang-up with labels.
Take for example your own wonderful (and hilarious, BTW) demonstration of this stupidity when you imply you don’t dispute that I could argue that fornication was wrong without invoking superstition / deity and then go on to say that (after obviously being distracted by labels), “atheism” determines “sin” arbitrarily. What else was my point in showing how fornication was wrong (using logical arguments and not superstition)?!
Apparently you aren’t able to make your own mind up on whether what you deem as “ought to do” requires supernatural, superstitious hoopla or not.
Ahem: it is you who fail to see my affirmation of your ability to argue that fornication was wrong based on appeal to reason as an atheist, does not negate my contention that atheism cannot example a consistent morality, as another atheist can just as well reject marriage and support fornication based on atheistic appeal to reason.
Was i not being sufficiently clear or are you purposely avoiding the issue?