Russia embraces religious intolerance with draconian blasphemy and anti-gay laws

[DeistPaladin]

Wait, I thought atheists believe morals are socially relative, so how is anything that Russia is doing here wrong? I am sorry, but you can’t have it both ways guys.

Oh Sweet Reason, not this shit again. I've already corrected you in the past on this, Stat. Now pay attention this time.

1. Subjective morality =/= anything goes and all opinions are equally valid.

I've used in the past with you my analogy of a salesman that I've hired who says "I've done a good job (subjective opinion)". I look at his numbers and say, "You haven't gotten any new customers (objective data). I think you've done a crappy job (subjective opinion)." He says, "well, 'good' is a relative term so our opinions are equally valid." And I say, "no, because I have objective data to back up my opinions on what constitutes 'good' and so my opinion is still on stronger ground than yours."

Some opinions can be better supported than others. So even though opinions are subjective or relative to our interpretations of the data, we can still have a rational discussion as to who's opinion is better supported by the facts.

The very fact that you are asking us to justify our moral evaluation of Russia's laws is a demonstration of some acknowledgement on your part that some opinions are better supported than others.

2. Morality is a measure of how we treat our fellow sentient beings.

We can't plug numbers into a spreadsheet and measure morality the same way we might measure temperature or distance with objective units like degrees or meters. Nonetheless, we can still use various tools to understand morality such as The Social Contract, Rawl's Veil of Ignorance or Bentham's Utility Principles. Bottom line is we evaluate the cruelty of actions, how they are dishonest in their dealings with others or how they infringe on the rights of others.

For example, using The Social Contract, I can ask how you might feel if speaking out publicly in ways that offended atheists is punishable by law. If you would not live in such a society, how can you justify such treatment of atheists?

Other examples I often like to ask of Christians:

• How would you feel if Muslims imposed Sharia law on you?
  
• How would you feel if a Wiccan school teacher led your children in a prayer to the Goddess?
  
• How would you feel if Hindus used your tax dollars to build a monument to Shiva?
  

These are all questions designed to help Christians understand how laws like these in Russia and attempted church-state infringements by Christians in America are morally offensive. They invoke The Social Contract. Your adherence to The Social Contract is essential if you wish to avoid the label of "hypocrite".

3. "GodWillsIt" does not make morality either objective or absolute.

If a being, however wise or powerful, decides what is moral, then by definition the opinions are subjective and they are subject to change, since a being might change his/her/its mind.

On the other hand, if God is evaluating what is moral instead of deciding, then morality exists outside of and independent to God and God is not required to determine what morality is and what is moral.

Babbling about God being the essence of goodness and the nature of God precludes God from being immoral does not escape the problem. It commits the following logical fallacies:

1. Bare assertion (God is good because we say so)
2. Begging the Question (God's actions are good because we define God as good. And we know that God's actions are good because we define good actions as what God wills. And we know that God is good because his actions are good).
3. Special Pleading (By "God" we of course mean "Jesus". Allah bad. Krishna bad...)

Are we learning?