Atheists only vote please: Do absolute MORAL truths exist? Is Rape ALWAYS "wrong"?

[wiploc]

Objective: Not subject to anyone's opinions, beliefs, values or judgment.
Subjective: Subject to someone's opinions, beliefs, values or judgment.
Universal: Not subject to time, place or culture.
Relative: Subject to time, place or culture.

Can we agree on the above definitions?

I don't see the point of those definitions. How are they useful or helpful? You've managed to make meteorology, and even mathematics, subjective. But you only did it by making "subjective" cover everything. What's the point of that?

Would you define "big" and "little" by saying that anything larger than a Planck length is big?

If so, I would suggest that "higher moral code" has no bearing on whether or not morality is subjective. If God exists and dictates a code of morality, then morality is still subjective, by definition.

Agreed. That is, if we're assuming that the god is dictating rules based on his whims. If he's dictating rules based on his observations of reality, then his moral rules may be objective (for some value of "objective") but they would still exist (and still be objective) even if the god did not exist.

...
Key words: "someone", "values", "judgment".

Ergo, morality is subjective.

Now, morality also deals with how we treat our fellow beings. You may have your culture but your freedom ends where it infringes on my life. This has to do with the concept of "sovereignty" of an individual as well as the "social contract".

Now you're suddenly talking as if you are in possession of cold hard facts. Objective facts. Why did you bother to define everything as subjective if you still need us to pay attention as if morality wasn't your personal whim?

Actions have consequences. Where the consequences impact others, they are not a matter of personal taste. I like strawberry ice cream. You might like chocolate ice cream. This is subjective and relative. However, you have no right to force feed me chocolate ice cream.

Why not, if this is all subjective?

Ergo, morality is not relative but rather universal.

Wow, that came out of the blue. Your definition of "universal" made everything, or almost everything, relative, didn't it?

Let's, just for illustration, push everything to the other end. Instead of defining universal as things that are in no degree subject to time, place, or culture, let's define things as universal if they are to any degree independent of time, place, or culture. That's just as skewed, but it's skewed in the other direction. Now you can say morality is universal.

Hope this helps.

I'm still confused, but thanks for trying.