I have in my discussions on religion made the comment that to discuss the bad (or perceived bad) properties of a God(s) for the unbeliever is not good logic as a thing must first exist before we can discuss what moral properties it may or may not posses.
This comment was directly influenced by the Kantian responses to the ontological argument for God's existence.
The reply I usually get is something to the effect of... "Can we not discuss Sauron's morality, or some sort of other fictitious being's moral status".
So my question will be this: is there merit to debating the moral nature of a deity you do not think exists? Or is the moral nature of a being predicated on the fact that it must first exist before we can make criticism on its moral status?