What kind of meta-ethical foundation has Dawkins provided for his ‘moral home’?

The Moral Necessity of a Godless Existence

Whatever else the Bible might be – and it really is a great work of literature – it is not a moral book and young people need to learn that important fact because they are very frequently told the opposite.

Who matters (or should) when scientists engage in ethical decision-making?

Bioethicist Richard Dawkins: Morality, Society Can Be "Intelligently Designed"

[Journalists] seem to feel let down when they discover that the real people aren't anything like the way they so relentlessly portray us; as if, since they've gone to the trouble of inventing extravagant caricatures of us, we should at least have the decency to live up to them in real life.
Also in Polish

Whatever else the Bible might be – and it really is a great work of literature – it is not a moral book and young people need to learn that important fact because they are very frequently told the opposite.

Even if you are unaccustomed to living by reason, if you are one of those, perhaps, who actively distrust reason, why not give it a try? Cast aside the prejudices of upbringing and habit, and come along anyway. (Also translated into Polish)

Following a week of attacks, the evolutionary biologist responds to his critics – and argues Britain must not make policy by following “Census Christians” who can’t name the first book of the New Testament.

In modern Britain, not even Christians put Christianity anywhere near the heart of their lives, and they don't want it put at the heart of public life either. David Cameron and Baroness Warsi, please take note.