I find it sad that almost every commenter here so far has not only defended the New Atheists, but they've also defended intuition and innate-conscience based mo

I find it sad that almost every commenter here so far has not only defended the New Atheists, but they've also defended intuition and innate-conscience based morality. You're doing the exact same thing the author of the article accused the New Atheists of. Stop defending emotion based morality and start arguing for rational, reality-based morality. I'm still studying Objectivism myself, but as far as I know, Ayn Rand has already based morality in reality. The article stating this at the end doesn't seem to be intended as a baseless assumption. It's basically saying "Here's a reality-based morality. For its validation, see Rand's works." I'd listen to it and actually try to understand where Rand was coming from before attacking her. I see idiotic attacks on her philosophy every day, and not a single one of the attackers understands or has even tried to understand it. If you think there's an alternative to Rational Egoism, base that alternative on facts, not on personal feelings or the whims of large groups of people. Again, stop arguing for emotion based morality, and start basing morality on facts.