The Struggle to do Good

[The Grand Nudger]

The notion that morality changes when the subject changes is the definition of moral subjectivism.

You didn't ask me if God changed His mind about His moral values. You asked me if God had different moral values, then would He have different moral values.

That being said, part of the definition of God is necessary existence (cannot fail to exist). This means He exists in all possible worlds, including the actualized world, and that He is intrinsically the same in each one of these worlds.

-and if he were different, would morality be different?

Then there's nothing bad about murder.  The good or bad making property is whether a subject has told you to do so, or refrain from doing so.  

Wow you're really bad at reasoning.

If objective moral values and duties are indeed ontologically grounded in God, then of course "murder is wrong" would flow from Him through commands and the conscience that He has given us.

If moral values are objective then they are independent of any subjects peculiarities, including a gods.  If moral values are objective it simply does not matter whether god is, what god does, or what god thinks.  

Which, again, is not an epistemological framework

You don't know what epistemology is then. Epistemology is the study of the nature of knowledge. Ontology is the study of the nature of existence. An epistemological framework is way of obtaining knowledge. Moral intuition, or conscience, is how we come to know objective moral values and duties which are ontologically grounded in God's nature.

You are asserting that subjectivism is the only way that we come to know objective values.  Do I need to point out the problem with that?

I don't personally have much of an issue with intuitionism in practice, but in order to translate intuition into objectivity, opinions to knowledge...one will need to refer to something exterior to the contents of their own conscience, or the contents of any other subjects attitudes, opinions, and intuitions.  This would include gods.  

Again, that's just what moral objectivism means.  There's no arguing this point.  It's inarguable.  Objective values cannot be grounded in any subjects nature, that would make those values subjective by definition.

I want you to take a breath here and consider something.

Honestly, I think I'm done talking to pseudo-intellectuals. I'm going to go watch my stocks.

Well, good luck with that.  I'll be here if you have any other questions about objective moral values.