Is Moral Nihilism a Morality?

[DLJ]

...
Lawyers want to differentiate whether someone can be held legally responsible for a given action. To a philosopher, this doesn't matter. Wrong is wrong whether one can be held legally accountable or not.

But back to your original point: if we can find a framework that is independent of opinion, we can refute relativism (that's easy)... But to refute moral nihilism, we need to show that this framework is not just "some shit we made up." That's a bit more challenging. My first strategy in arguing against nihilism is to suggest that it is "runaway skepticism." Things like math and science can't hold up to nihilistic scrutiny either. They both could be said to be "useful fictions" without any truth value at all.

So if someone is going to argue moral nihilism, I first establish that moral realism is as objective as math and science. Any skepticism so robust as to render something like math a "useful fiction" ought not be leveled at moral realism. To say, as the wiki quote in the OP says that giving value to human life is arbitrary is just such a skepticism.

Yup. Again, weak semantics is the issue here.

Are you up for a conversation aimed at tightening up those semantics in order to arrive at an explanatory “framework that is independent of opinion”?