“Is it good for one to lie or to cheat?”
Depends on the situation. If I’ve got Anne Frank hiding in my attic and Nazi troops ask me if I’m harboring any Jews, I think most would agree that I did the ethically right decision. And then some might disagree. We call them “psychopaths.”

“Is it admirable for one to murder or to steal?’
Murder? I’d say no in most cases. But is it admirable to kill? Certainly we can all think of cases when killing may not only be acceptable but where it might even be a moral obligation such as in defense of others. Stealing? I wouldn’t think less of any man who stole a loaf of bread to feed their starving family.

“Do we applaud as heroes those who hate their neighbors?”
According to the Bible, we’re supposed to. Again though, I’m sticking with saying this is a case by case basis. I have no idea what my heroes thought of their neighbors. If Ben Franklin hated his neighbors, I wouldn’t think any less of him.

“Is a man good if he abandons his wife and children?”
Again, I require nuance to answer. Sure, abandoning one’s wife & child is not admirable. But Ben Franklin did a lot of great things and yet he more or less abandoned his family for a period of time. Do you think people can be judged good or not based on a single bad decision they’ve made in their lives? In most cases, I’d say that that’s short-sighted.

“Is it good to rape someone?”
The Bible says yes. But I can’t think of a single case where I’d think so.

“Your poster claims that there are at least one million New Yorkers who are good without the aid of God. Are you saying that there are one million New Yorkers who have never lied or cheated”

Not necessarily. And I’d be quite skeptical if such a claim.

“My answer to your question is this – “there is none that doeth good.”

“And my answer is that you’re projecting your own wretched character onto others.”

“No one is perfect; therefore no one can truly claim to be good.”

What?! Repeatedly asking, “what is good” doesn’t entitle you to make up your own definition of the word. How do you logically justify that good requires perfection?

“There may be one million New Yorkers who claim that they are somewhat good, and there might even be a few who say that they are almost good. But there is not a single person in all of New York, America or even the world that can claim to be the ultimate personification of goodness.”

Nor has anyone made such a claim. Do you understand what a superlative is? Do you understand the logical difference between “good” and “goodest” aka “best”?

“There is no one that IS good.”
Now here is a declarative statement, so I must insist that you back it up with empirical evidence.

“You claim to be a coalition of reason, and as such I challenge you to reason with me on this.”

I’m afraid any attempt to reason with you would be a horrible waste of time. As Barney Frank would say, it’d be like trying to talk to a dining room table.

“Can one be almost innocent of murder? Can a murderer ever become un-guilty of his crime? Can he remove his guilt by countless acts of atonement? If the slaying of a single innocent life makes one a murderer forever, does not the telling of a single lie mark one as a liar for all time?”

No. This is called a false dichotomy.

“And if a single act of sin remains on one’s record forever, how then can anyone truly claim to be good?”

First, you have to prove that such a thing as “sin” exists because you merely assert it.

“We, ladies and gentlemen, are not good.”

And by “we” you mean you.

“We are all as an unclean thing”
I’m sure if you look hard enough, you’ll find a shower.

“And who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one.”
Anyone with a washer and drier. Your metaphors require serious improvement.

“What is good? We are not good.”

Again, by “we” you mean you.