Theistic morality

[Purple Rabbit]

Just because, as a phenomenon, morality is a subjective thing that has changed from culture to culture, that doesn't mean moral standards themselves are subjective, though.A slave-owner was morally wrong at the time, even though society tolerated slave-owning. No doubt rjh4 would now say, 'Why were they wrong? If you don't have God, there can be no objective morals'. But he has yet to show us why God's command is not arbitrary, and why the Bible doesn't permit slavery. Theism gets us nowhere on the objective morality front.

Please explain to me to what absolute moral standard you are referring here. Is it not just your moral standard with which you judge the past? Is it the moral standard of the slaves? Is it the moral standard of slave traders at that time? I don't see how that can be? It seems to me that you are asserting some mother of all moral standards here without the evidence to support it. Slavery is condoned in the bible but nowadays seen as wrong by the church. Isn't that a clear indication that there is no absolute reference for moral?

Personally, I believe morality comes from the recognition that the interests of our fellow humans and those of other species are just as important to them as our own are to us. Once we suppose this to be true, we have the basis for a solid utilitarian ethical system.

You don't need any absolute moral standard for that. It's just an economic choice for synergy over battle that both involved parties can benefit from given the boundary condition are in place (like mutual trust of a certain degree). Also observe that the economic rule itself is an IS not an OUGHT. Given the right conditions it will play out no matter whether there is explicit rephrasing of it into prescriptive moral codes. You cannot derive an ought from an is but it may be practical to sync an OUGHT to an IS, i.e. it may be beneficial to all involved.