This:
"We both know racial profiling is always or in the most case advocated by white people so that for me already cast suspicions on the intention behind it and to the whole enterprise is based on being unbiased."

And this:
"They are a means of survival, protection, and defense."

@DanielCC
"(the former term does give the atheist a potential counter-attack though, as they might try to argue an alternative transcendent as on atheistic moral Platonism)"

I know that not all atheists are naturalists, but many of them are. Wouldn't that be problematic against their naturalism? Unless of course they can come up with another atheistic metaphysical theory that holds objective morality or find a compatibility between naturalism and moral Platonic realism.  

@ QED
I suppose. Here he talks about Aquinas' take on the POE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BpBaSftHHc
According to the video, the lecture happened last year and this is the approach that Brian Davies takes in his works. 

I'm inclined to agree with some of the commentators. I don't find (1) and (3) convincing. Regarding (2), so far the Modal Problem of Evil is one that I think is the most interesting out of all the arguments from evil.

I second what QED said about (4) and (5), could you elaborate on those?

 

I was talking about this: "Is it even possible to imagine an abstract concept without allowing the entry of any particulars into the imagination?"

Maybe this article by Dr. Feser may help you: http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2014/12/progressive-dematerialization.html

Cheers!