Christian morality delusions

[Amarok]

I do have a commitment t objective moral values. It just disagrees with yours. We both agree that objective moral truths exist. You still haven't explained moral reflection and argument.

What do you want to know about either from a realists pov?  

To test whether I have your stance correct: I believe you feel moral facts must tend towards social stability or what we have reason to to. The problem with that being that the beliefs that inform the morality reflects the way the world is now hence my poorly phrased sliding scale. I apologize if it offended your sensibilities. I simply meant to convey that is is mutable without an exterior reference to the society it's being constructed in. I understand your objection that it can't be a universalized consensus of opinion. If this is your belief.

No, to all of the above.  More importantly, that's a description of moral relativism....not moral realism. 

None of the rest of your pointed responses were really a question you desired to have answered, so to be brief I'll also re-approach the OP, then I'll get back to work. In a universe where moral facts exist, there is a moral realm. Objectivity and measurability are the desire of the realm, ie. what is "good" must represent what I would desire under calm and informed conditions. Universality can't be reached because desires inform decisions and because knowledge of all things is out of our reach.

Reference to what we may desire is a subjective morality, not moral realism.  That is a mind dependent fact of the matter.  

Could we at least agree that objectivity would be a valuable goal and that a proper environment with reflection and sharing of knowledge could increase education on morality and bring us closer to consensus on morality?

We could agree, but it would be a deceptive agreement so long as we are referring to different things when we employ the term..and we are.

Once again having to explain moral realism huh