doubting epicurus

this statement is of course quote popular of helpful if one wants to make the case against the judeo christian god of the old testament or maybe any other 'divine being'. but then this statement is build on the premise that there's a difference between good and evil. if there's no god, how does one know what is good and what's evil? since there's still some kind of duality between life and death, me and you, how does one know what is good and evil? that's a very long and interesting debate which has been going on for a long time in history and maybe is the thing which distinguishes the west in a philosophical way more from other traditions. if there'd be an absolute difference between good and evil, which would be obvious to figure out for everyone, then why would there be so much differences and conflicts about different ideas? if morality was universal why mankind developed so many different ideas, and then again if religion was only to control, at the same time one has a mystic division in every culture, from which adherents seem to utter more or less the same statements. on one hand religion seems to provide people with some kind of selfreflecting psychology on personal shortcomings and a code for regulating familial and personal behaviour into a societal order. on the other hand, maybe it's the reason why it has this, it tends to divide or be abused. but maybe that's not the fault of 'religion' per se but of the shortcomings of the human mind, projecting its own shortcomings on the world, thereby leading to a utilitarian creed. but then again modern discours against religions is mostly against it's violence and inegalitarianism. but in troubled times when there would be no thinking of a global brotherhood because of war and famine, egalitarianism, individualism and pacifism would be some kind of unthinkable luxury only cultivated intellectually in the heads of mystics. but then in some traditions this idea got quite some reverence which might have led to creeds as buddhism and christianity. again being manipulated and distorted by man's limited ability to relate in a philosophical way to seeing a higher lifeform than themselves whether it be the love for one's neighbours, nature or the transcendent. which should also include respect not hate towards unbelievers. maybe believers of islam and other religions might sense that if one starts doubting certain aspects of religion, the whole philosophical body is about to be brought down. what if there where no religion? then morality would be subjective, leading towards polygamy, abortion, drug use and cheating as morally acceptable. then without some notion of something transpersonal the only thing living for is sensual gratification, as every religious book acknowledges. idle hands are the devil's work. and with a welfare state, there's no way for enthusiastic people to encourage some form of ethical behavior resulting in long term thinking, sensual restraint hindering them from impulsive actions. then the atheist traditions must not whine about individualism which it has fomented itself. without the welfare state, or when it's bankrupcy advents, there's neither religion nor society which is respected anymore thanks to an individualistic, anarchistic philosophical trend that went mainstream. without religion, why would the thief, the incestuous, the polygamist, the alcoholist be immoral? after all, pleasure is the highest good, and fault lies not anymore with the person but by society for not lending adequate help. nothing stops people from robbing and rioting, cheating and abusing. while religion might have its shortcomings it might 've been the original source of morality, from shamanism, rock paintings and ecstatic forest dance to what we have now in the form of philosophy, psychology, modern electronic art. there must be some kind of morality and it's source must be something transpersonal, something transcendent. and this must be plotinus' one, the hidden link behind all religions, which has since been forgotten and transformed into different belief systems, which over time have lost their significance in the age of darwin, freud, marx and hegel. but still morality and existence are too complex to be fit in oneliners i guess.