Quote:

We've had this argument already ... which is why I will not respond to it. You go on about how evolution could not possibly provide a healthy society, which is obviously a crappy viewpoint to say the least.



That's not the point. Evolution has nothing to do with this. Is is whether or not moral reletivism is even a valid viewpoint. Stay on topic.

Quote:

What's next? Claiming we are in denial? I for one am not afraid to discuss anything, you just repeat the same stuff over and over again.



The only answer I get is that, "I won't dignify that with a response." That's why I have to keep asking.

Ok, since you seem to have some trouble even elaborating on your own viewpoints, I'll do it for you. Tell me if I make any mistakes. Hitler was wrong, because the allies won the war and so the majority rule decided that killing people is wrong. Not because murder is wrong.

If you say murder is always wrong then you're imposing a moral absolute, in which case morals are not relative and you're still wrong because you said that morals are not absolute.

If one culture CAN get it wrong, and call murder ok. Then perhaps one culture can get it wrong and call homosexual pedophilia wrong. Perhaps there is an ultimate standard for right and wrong, and humans can't always figure out what it is, but sometimes we get it right.

If you say that there isn't an ultimate standard for right and wrong, then if the majority says its ok to kill minorities, and society doesn't falter for it, then you so, "So what? Who are we to say anything is wrong?" If you say that they were wrong, even if the majority accepted it, then you're imposing an absolute moral, in which case your viewpoint is still invalid.

So either you say, anything goes as long as it works for society, (which would include slavery, which certainly helped the economy) and you then have to admit that your relativist viewpoint is dangerous (or not admit it, but it'll be blatantly obvious), or you have to admit that there are absolute morals, in which case morals are not relative, and are absolute. Furthermore, since we can't always seem to get it right, it might seem we're only partially discovering some higher, ultimate truth. Whether or not you think that ultimate truth comes from a creator or not is irrelevant. However, it would seem logically obvious there are moral absolutes. I think we should give God credit for them, and obey them, you think we should figure out for ourselves what they are.

I don't think we disagree that there are absolutes, you just want to be able to decide what those absolutes are for yourself, to sum it up.

Unless you're going to say that American slavery, and Hitler weren't really all that bad because they worked out for those societies at the time.

"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."