Three obvious ones. One is Belief in gods and the morality they push on us. Major obvious flaw is gods arent real (plus the morality they spout is all over the shop). so thats easily ruled out.What is the alternative?
The second is a preference for the sanctity of non human objects like the environment or other species above humans. But given the earth isnt self aware and lacks emotion/experience and humans have far more self awareness/experience/emotion than most other animals these preferences appear to be wrong as well.
the third is a preference for only a subgroup of humans. Subgroups such as races or nations being obvious groups that many people believe are above others. But there is no sub group of people that has more self awareness/experience/emotion then others. well no significant difference in any case. we are largely all the same in this regard. Thus there is no justification for advocating a sub group of people above another.
this leads us to advocating a humanism for all system. what we should be debating is what economic/social system is the one that best advocates humanism for all and what is the best metric of human wellness/prosperity/value.
ive tried a couple of times on here to start up such debates but those threads all die straight away. Instead we still debate topics that we know are false, like religion, or relatively minor side topics like climate change which while important dont get to the bigger picture of what is human value, how do we measure/weigh it and how do we best create a society to maximise it.