Ben Shapiro vs Neil deGrasse Tyson: The WAR Over Transgender Issues

[Thumpalumpacus]

"A person might think" is the clue here.

I'll need more clues.  People think alot of things, some of them are untrue.  That a math problem refers to more than one value is not generally taken to mean that the solution is subjective.  Amusingly enough, in most other fact assertions commonly accepted as fact assertions, and objectively true ones, the greater the number of referent facts and values the more compellingly true said statement is.  

To wit, while help and harm get you alot, you'll probably need even more values to refer to in order to make compelling fact-alike statements about moral desert.  I say compelling here in a metaethically neutral sense, where a statement can be true but not objectively so.  A subjectivist will refer to more than just one of their opinions.  A relativist will refer to more than just one of their societies' decrees.  An objectivist will refer to more than just one (purported) fact of the matter in question.

When you refer to human moral opinion, you abandon moral objectivity. That's because opinions aren't facts.