Conscience and the Moral Argument as Evidence for the Goodness of God.

[Belacqua]

A little earlier, you told me "morality varies too much from culture to culture to be based on an objective standard." 

So if the culture of the Old Testament says that it is acceptable to drown bunny rabbits, do you have any objective reason to say that they're wrong? Wouldn't the morality of the time be correct for the time, although for us it may be unpalatable? 

It sounds as though you do have some standard by which you judge morals from other times and places. Otherwise you'd have to say "when they did it, it was moral."

My standard is very simple:  Does it cause unnecessary suffering?  If so, it's wrong.  From another culture's POV perhaps the Noachide flood was seen as moral.  From my POV it is obviously immoral.  Subjectivity on both sides of the equation.

OK, that's fair. You hold that unnecessary suffering is a bad thing to cause, but there is no way to posit this as a moral standard that always applies.