My views on objective morality

[Catholic_Lady]

I feel very confident that it is. Of course, there is always the chance that I could be wrong. But let me put it this way, I feel as confident in my beliefs as I am confident that my husband loves me. Could I be wrong about my husband loving me? I mean, sure... anything is possible. but I feel confident enough that he loves me to the point where I am ok with saying "I know my husband loves me." Same thing applies to my religious beliefs. I feel confident enough to say "I know God is real, I know He gave us free will, I know He is love and goodness, and that anything outside of that is immoral." How do I know? How am I so confident? Again, it is not something that can ever be summed up in a forum post. The short answer is, given everything I have experienced/seen/learned in my life, has led me to believe what I do. 

1. Does you belief in objective morality stem from your faith in your god?  If you lost your faith, would you still believe in objective morality?

If you are referring to when God literally talks to people in the Old Testament, I don't believe that ever happened. I believe Jesus is God, and I believe in what He taught us about morality - doing good for others as we want them to do for us, loving others as ourselves, and forgiving our enemies, etc. I believe that is the basis for all of morality.  

2. Does that not require interpretation, which of necessity involve subjectivity?   

I'm not trying to explain why anyone else should believe as I do. Also, there is no way I know of to convince anyone. I think it's something that a person would need to conclude for him/herself based on their own understandings. I don't understand how that ties in to objective morality though. Perhaps you can clarify?  

3. Your OP seemed like you were trying to explain why you accept morality as objective. Is not your belief that morality is objective a belief?

I disagree that one cannot convince another of certain things and that morality is one of those certain things, myself.  I think if morality is objective -- if it exists outside of human experience and is simply a fact of the Universe -- then I should think that as with any fact, its factuality would be demonstrable. I know that if you could demonstrate its factuality, I would be forced to revise my views so that they comport with objective reality.

My answer for this is the same as up top (the why are you Catholic question, basically). I think the first part of my response works to answer this.

4. But your Catholicism is based on your personal (which is to say, subjective) experiences.

Sorry I've been MIA the past couple of days. I've had some things to attend. 

Anyway, I've numbered your questions 1-4, so I can address each one down here. 

1. Honestly, they kind of go together. Objective morality makes sense to me. For example, it makes sense to me that feeding a starving child is objectively good, and raping a vulnerable child is objectively evil. To me, it makes 0 sense to think those things are just matters of opinion, and that there is no concrete truth behind them. Like, "well, I think raping kids is immoral, so it's immoral to me, personally... but if someone else thinks raping a kid is good, then that person is not wrong/incorrect in their thinking, because there is no true or real answer." That makes no sense to me. It makes 0 sense that moral/immoral behaviors are no different from a person's taste in food or favorite color. 
I feel there is something inside of us that helps us distinguish between objective good from objective evil (at least on the more obvious issues) and even people who do horrible things have to come up with all kinds of justifications to tell themselves that what they're doing isn't actually bad (think Holocaust). I feel like we have somewhat of an inherent understanding between good/evil, and that we know we should strive for good. 
...And then God comes right along with that, because without God, it makes 0 sense for objective morality to exist. As the video explains, for a law to exist, there needs to be a lawmaker. It makes 0 sense to me for objective morality not to exist, and if objective morality exists, it makes 0 sense to me for there not be a supreme being. 

2. Yes, it requires interpretation, but I don't think that means a true or correct interpretation doesn't exist, and that it's all just a matter of opinion.  

3. Yes, it is a belief. But kind of like my answer above, I don't think this means that a person's belief can't be correct, just because it's called "a belief". As the example I gave explains, I also "believe" my husband loves me. Does he ACTUALLY love me, or doesn't he? If he does, then my belief is correct. 
I still stand by the notion that there are things in life that cannot be demonstrated factually/scientifically because they are beyond our natural world. Objective morality comes from a place of the supernatural, as does God... but that is what separates theists from atheists in the first place - a belief/disbelief in the supernatural. 

4. Yes, I believe what I do for my own reasons. Others may have different reasons for believing the exact same thing as me. For example, maybe one person witnessed something supernatural and that was a big part of what led them to the Church, maybe someone else studied history and philosophy extensively, and that was a big part of what led him/her. But at the end, they both have the same belief.