Deconversion and some doubts

[GrandizerII]

Nice strawman. I don’t believe in a rule maker, since I don’t view right and wrong as something created or made.

Are we next going to have a debate about what is meant by "created or made"? You've made it very clear in this thread that you believe in a Good that is akin to a rule-maker and that "explains" the moral oughts and ought nots. Without that Good, not even rape can be morally wrong.

I’m using ought in regards to what the term implies ie obligations and duties, unlike terms like should or wish.

Terms like "should" and "must" also imply obligations and duties. And society has been good at imposing these obligations and duties.

Saying I ought to do x, unlike saying i should or you wish I do x, implies I have an obligation of duty to do x. To use the term ought in place of where you might mean something like wish is just equivocating on your part.

I can see a difference between "should" and "wish"; I don't, however, see how "should", in this context, does not imply obligations/duties.

And no, societies don’t see themselves as  as moral rule makers, or as moral authorities, anymore so than they see themselves as makers of objective truth. They may see themselves as a political and legal authority but not a moral one. Pretty much all societies have seen morality as a matter of truth, not of their own making.

You seem to have a problem with separating "X is wrong" from "One ought not to do X", and this paragraph shows it very well. If you can't, for a second, condition yourself to separate the two statements from each other to see my POV, you will never get it.

Secondly people don’t see their societies as the creators or authority on right and wrong either. If your society put all its legal and political support behind the holocaust, you wouldn’t say okay that means the holocaust is a morally good thing, for the same reason you wouldn’t say the earth is flat, just because most of your society thinks it is.

And here, you do it again. So let's be clear here on what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that X may be intrinsically wrong, but that society generally creates the "oughts" and ought nots". Individuals can as well. But in neither of these cases, is the Good "saying" that "one ought not to do X", and if so, I haven't gotten a call from that Entity yet. All I know is that it's us humans who impose these "oughts".

Secondly granting society moral authority, would  be like granting the twitter verse moral authority. If you tried to derive right and wrong from twitter opinions, or social opinions, you’d be  more a cartoon, than a good person, a tool, rather than someone to be respected

Maybe try to learn the other person's POV better before arguing against it.