Debate: CONSCIENCE: IS THERE A UNIVERSAL MORAL LAW?
Side: yes

There is a specific statement that you acknowledged which I think is very important to take note: "You are right that almost no one lives that way". Why is that important? While many claim to hold on to the relativism position, they really do not practice it in their lives, as you yourself consented. Granted, you have your odd balls such as Hitler, Charles Manson, robbers, thieves, etc. that (consistently) lives out this view. Relativism holds that societies and/or individuals decide what is right and wrong and that those values vary from culture to culture or person to person. Hugh Mercer Curtler, Professor of Philosophy, Southwest Minnesota State University, quotes Nancy L. Gillford, "Naive relativism is certainly alive and well in the idioms of our ordinary language "True for you, true for me" is echoed in "to each his own," "everyone is entitled to his own opinion," "when in Rome, do as the Romans do," "different strokes for different folks," "whatever feels good," to cite but a few. We use these idioms casually and comfortably. There seems to be little need to ask ourselves what we are really saying" (Curtler, Mercer, Hugh, Ethical Argument: Critical Thinking in Ethics, p. 8-9). That is my point, "There seems to be little need to ask ourselves what we are really saying". You followed with another statement which was, "this does not inhibit us from trying to stop them when they do things we don't like". You gave an illustration to make your point with that statement: "The burglar who is trying to invade my home is not morally wrong from an objective standpoint, but it would still be natural and sensible for me to try to stop him. This is not because I think he is objectively wrong, but rather because I have a personal interest in self-preservation and the preservation of my material possessions and the safety of my family. My belief in ethical relativism does not mean that my instincts, feelings, or senses of responsibility and ownership can not factor into my behavior and decisions. In fact, it does not even require that I refrain from punishing others for their behavior" Let us cross-examine your illustration in light of the definition of what relativism is vs your reactions, your feelings, instincts, and natural and sensible for you towards the burglar. Before I do that, objective morality holds that morals are not opinions. They are not personal, private decisions, and they are not descriptions of behavior. They are prescriptions for behavior and motive that have the force of a command. They contain a sense of obligation and oughtness that is universal, authorative, and outweighs considerations of culture, time, and place. There is a common core of moral values, standards, values in the vast human societies from different cultures and time. I gave a list of that in my debate with kamranw. The ones that are relevant to your illustration are: “we should not cause unnecessary harm to others in our society”, “we should be responsible for our actions”, “we should be considerate of the well-being and happiness of others, in particular of those we are responsible for”, “we should be willing to protect our families and children from others who might harm them”. Why is that important? J.P. Moreland, distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University in La Mirada, California, gave a set of necessary and/or sufficient conditions for defining morality: 1. A judgment is moral only if it is a prescriptive imperative which recommends actions, attitudes, and motives and not merely a factual description about actions, attitudes, and motives. 2. A judgment is moral only if it makes reference to human flourishing, human dignity, the welfare of others, the prevention of harm, and the provision of benefit. Inasmuch as this criterion makes exclusive reference to human beings, it is clearly inadequate as a necessary condition for morality. 3. A judgment is moral only if it is accepted as a supremely authoritative, overriding guide to conduct, attitudes, and motives. The point of this criterion is that morality must have top priority over all else in our lives. In this way, morality is contrasted with mere custom, etiquette, and, perhaps, law. 4. A judgment is moral only if it is universalizable; that is, if it applies equally to all relevantly similar situations. The main point of this criterion is to express the conviction that moral judgments must be impartially applied to moral situations by taking into account all of the morally relevant features of the situation. ( J. P. Moreland, Norman L. Geisler, "The Life and Death Debate: Moral Issues of Our Time", p.x)You really do not believe that ethical relativism is true and here is why:1. "I have a personal interest in self-preservation and the preservation of my material possessions and the safety of my family"2. "...does not mean that my instincts, feelings, or senses of responsibility and ownership can not factor into my behavior and decisions. In fact, it does not even require that I refrain from punishing others for their behavior"3. "...this does not inhibit us from trying to stop them when they do things we don't like.That is objective morality and not ethical subjectivism talking.Here is the main point Swryght, you believe in the Natural Law which is, "a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as inherent in all human beings and forming a basis for human conduct" (Compact Oxford English Dictionary). You made this statement, "...it would still be natural and sensible for me to try to stop him."Hence, your conclusion statement, "ethical subjectivism does not require me to behave as though I don't care what other people do, or prevent me from trying to interfere when they do something that infringes on my life. My actions and beliefs are just as morally neutral as those of others" is not consistent with the ethical subjectivism view because if that was true, why would you push your morality on the burgler? Why not allow him/her to follow through thereby, in your own words, "...ethical subjectivism requires that we regard others' beliefs and actions as morally neutral"?