Deconversion and some doubts

[Acrobat]

Let’s work with this analogy here.

If I have two apples and acquired two additional apples, I’ll have four in total.
So when I say 2+2 = 4, I am indicating something descriptive.

Now when someone says it’s wrong for me to keep/ steal your wallet, it’s not merely descriptive, they’re not just trying to tell me about the physical consequences of doing so, all of which I could be well aware of, but something prescriptive as well, they’re saying I ought not steal.

Do you believe that statement that I ought not steal is objectively true, as 2+2 = 4?

Suppose I am a moral nihilist, who believes there’s nothing truly right or wrong about anything, that there’s nothing morally wrong about me stealing your wallet, what facts am I denying here?

Ought is based on unwritten but agreed upon rules that ensure we live in a society that respects people's rights and thereby our own rights, because it's in our best interest that our (and other people's) rights be respected.

So it’s only on ought for those who agreed on these rules? Sort of like how Muslim cultures agree that woman ought to cover their faces, it’s only an ought for those who agreed to such a rule, but not for those like us that don’t?

Now perhaps you grant society moral authority, and the ability to assign to you moral obligations, I don’t.