but issues like abortion?
cold blooded murder?
are there moral issues that are objectively wrong?
Moral relativism (ethical truths are Subjective and depend on the individual or group who hold them)
Moral absolutism (ethical rules are Objective and universally binding in all similar cases)
the question is which is true? they both cant be true?
why is this important?
1. because moral relativism cheapens human life.
How would the world be if everyone lived by moral relativism?
2. with moral relativism anything goes!
3. moral relativism creates moral cowards
there are 4 problems!
1. if moral relativism is true then society can not have moral reformers
(corrie ten boom, william wilberforce , Dr. martin luther king
whatever a society believes its true for that society so a moral reformer cannot stand outside and tell them they need to change!.
the person who would be immoral would be the moral reformer.
dont we know there was moral reformers in history?
if it was true we'd have to throw out all moral reformers out of history books
2. moral relativist cannot improve there morality.
you can only improve on something if there is a standard outside of you that you gain more accuracy according too.
you can change your morality but cant improve it.
so all the things that moral reformers have done for the world wasnt an improvement. it was just a change.
dont we just know that there have been moral improvements?? isnt that an obvious fact!
3. moral relativists cannot complain about the problem of evil
4. Moral relativism is UNLIVABLE
so i could come over to your house and rape you girlfriend, wife, sister or whatever. and you cant do a damn thing about it coz you cant get ruffled
at me coz i live in a relativist moral world and thats what i believe is right
we cant live like its true. its impossible.
we know what people believe not by what they say, but how they want to be treated.