Atheists: Unqualified for Intellectual Discourse
The subject of their arguments may be very noble; they may talk about the state of the nations and the welfare of society, but their opinions cannot be seriously considered. They are not worthy of passing such judgments. If a man is upright in his conduct and moral judgment, we can give credibility to his words, but if not, his words lose their credibility.
This is especially true when it relates to the question of deity. It is interesting to note that the moral standards of men are directly related to their concept about God. Those who admit their own ignorance have a passable standard, while insistent atheists invariably have a low level of moral responsibility.
I do not claim to know all atheists, but of the several thousand that I know, none of them possess a notably commendable morality. You may tell me that there was once a moral atheist, but if there was one, he is dead. Or you may tell me that there will be a moral atheist, but whoever he may be, he is not here yet. At least we can say that for now, we do not know a moral atheist.
Watchman Nee, Is there God? You Be the Judge!
From Holopupenko of Reasoning Repaired, who also mentioned that:
1) An atheist may have a moral code, but he can provide no objective basis for it and hence he should not be trusted.
2) An atheist who claims there is no God based on alleged "scientific evidence" is not speaking as a scientist nor is his claim scientific.