> I'm not a religious person, but the thing that the anti-religion movements have failed spectacularly at is providing a universal, teachable framework for basic morality.
Because no such framework exists? If we remove totalitarian pressure to enforce one coherent moral framework (either religious or secular) to all, we end up with pluralistic society in which various persons have fundamentally different moral intuitions, and therefore it needs extensive formal system for cooperation and conflict solving.
Fundamentally different moral intuitions cannot be resolved except by conversion or war. There is no middle ground between "burn the witch" and "save the woman". Taking your own last sentence, participating in an "extensive formal system" assumes a shared morality that prefers "cooperation and conflict solving" to strength and conquest.
Because no such framework exists? If we remove totalitarian pressure to enforce one coherent moral framework (either religious or secular) to all, we end up with pluralistic society in which various persons have fundamentally different moral intuitions, and therefore it needs extensive formal system for cooperation and conflict solving.