You're confusing morality with moral claims.
> "since I would have no absolute standard for morality." <
You don't have one now.
> " I would probably steal, murder, manipulate, etc. as I felt like, provided I wasn't caught." <
Then you're a sociopath who should seek help before you harm yourself or someone else.
> "why don't you just do whatever you freakin' want to?" <
Generally, I do. Incidentally, I've never wanted to kill or steal or do any of the unpleasant things you would apparently enjoy without your god-belief.
> "Is it all just based on feelings?" <
It's based on some basic assumptions about average human behavior, and the logic takes care of itself from there. For example:
Universally Preferable Behavior
http://www.freedomainradio.com/FreeBooks.aspx#upb
The Superiority of Secular Morality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq2C7fyVTA4
> "Both can't be right." <
It depends on what you're talking about.
> "I would just ignore the moral feelings that I had because I would have no logical reason to obey them." <
Then you clearly have little knowledge of ethics.
> "I would have no reason to be moral if I thought there was no god, as all I would have was a feeling." <
Actions have consequences, whether you feel good about it or not.
> " I find it interesting that He also commanded that slaves be released every so often, and He got pretty mad at the people who didn't obey that rule." <
I think you're sugar-coating. Regardless, would that argument work today? "Oh, it's cool. I let my slaves go every so often."
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Slavery
> "Biblical slavery wasn't the same as black people in chains being whipped while they picked cotton nearly naked." <
It was pretty much the same.
Edit:
> "I've already explained that." <
You clearly stated that you believe morals come from a god, and that without this god-belief you would "probably steal, murder, manipulate, etc. as I felt like, provided I wasn't caught." You attempt to backpedal from this sociopathic position you established, but your later clarification is just a weak restatement of the same idea. Even if you were a witless shell of a person who lacked any ability to reason about his own behavior, is just "feeling" that murder, rape and theft are wrong insufficient to prevent you from engaging in those behaviors? If not, you might be a socipath, and I say that not as an insult but in a medical context.
"...a person with a psychopathic personality whose behavior is antisocial, often criminal, and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sociopath
You claim to have a conscience, but I question that based solely on things you have written here. If you do, then one is left to wonder why you think it would magically disappear if you didn't believe in a god. It wouldn't, as hundreds of millions of atheists and nonreligious persons the world over can attest. This brings up the interesting corollary of what you think about individuals who believe in gods other than yours. Are they also killers-in-waiting since they don't share your exact belief? Some alleged gods (i.e. people who believe in those gods) don't echo the prominent Judo-Christian moral claims.
Your entire premise is broken. But you can't possibly do something reasonable like rethink it, can you? No, you'd rather accuse your respondents of not paying attention.