If it wasn't for religion

[Acrobat]

Okay, so your moral objectivism, would be akin to this final revision of “taste objectivism”?

The same logic you use to hold moral objectivism, can be applied to form taste objectivism as well.

While some things may subjectively taste bad, at least some things objectively taste bad? The reason why one set of taste remain in the subjective category, is because it’s not shared as in common as those tastes that are shared more commonly? A strong consensus of subjective taste, makes them objective tastes?

More or less, sure....though..again, because I'm a realist somethings intersubjectivity isn't the same as somethings being objective - though ultimately the two can be difficult to separate.  

Yellowness of things, the blueness of things, the squareness of things, exist objectively, out there, not dependent on our thoughts or categorizations, or beliefs. The balloon is yellow regardless of what I think or conceptualize. So either badness and goodnesses exists in such a way, or they don’t? I’m assuming the answer from you is that they don’t.

Do goodness and badness exists outside of our mental designations, or are they dependent on such conceptual designations to exists. That absent of human being to make such designations good and badness don’t exist? I.e, That holocaust is neither good nor bad.

Facts are not dependent on our beliefs, or thoughts, or designations. Yet you seem to insist that moral facts are.

You keep insisting that I do no matter how many times I tell you otherwise.  Why ask me a question about what I think if you're going to ignore my answer and provide your own in it's place?

-I think- that there are moral facts of a matter, but I'm not certifying every random fucking thing that falls out of peoples mouths and gets called a fact as one of them.  Mostly, because people like you exist and make such claims, lol.  It's certainly possible for the things a person calls a fact to be dependent on their beliefs.   You've been a case example of that in this thread and the last.  

For example, you believe that an atheist realist is delusional and incoherent.  On the basis of that belief..and seemingly nothing else, you've breathlessly repeated as much as though it were a fact.

Okay so the goodness, badness of things, don't exist independent of conceptual designations.  Good and bad, exists relative to some particular standpoint, and don't exist outside of that standpoint. 

Outside of this standpoint the holocaust is neither good nor bad. 

Agreed?

I'm not ignoring your answer, I don't find your answer all that clear, so I do my best to tell you how I understand your responses. If my understanding is wrong, then I expect additional clarifications.