Objective morality as a proper basic belief

[Astonished]

What would be the test to verify you had the right ones?

It would, objectively, depend on whatever matter we were discussing, wouldn't it?  That's an impossible question to answer in a vacuum.  We'll continue with the rape theme..since it's whats on every frothing christers mind when they barge in talking about morality (and isn;t -that- disturbing?, lol?)

Is there something or somethings about rape that makes it a moral matter?  That makes it bad?  Something verifiable, something objective?  I think there is.  Can you identify anything like that?  

I think that's where the problem lies.

Why?  What's the problem?

Do we get to vote?  

Sure, but it wont be your vote that decides anything, objectively...it would be a fact of the matter, or many facts of the matter, that decided the matter

So, this is just my pedantic brain working here, but it's about definitions. See, you don't look at the mechanism the way I do. I see a, for example, mathematical expression f(x) which I'm positive you must be familiar with. Now let's say that our machine for gauging morality is that function. You can plug whatever in the fuck you want as your x. Well-being, god-dick, WHATEVER. THE. FUCK. The choice of what to put in there is subjective. It is also subject to change. Someone with a fundamentalist morality can become an atheist and have to forcefully change that view and insert something else in place of whatever 'x' they had in there. But again, that is something that needs to be chosen, subjectively.

Once you settle on your particular x, then yes, I agree, there are certain concrete goals you can set as far as things to strive for and things to avoid. So in this one very, very limited aspect, there is some objectivity; we can determine what tends to contribute more to one side or another; however, there is no means by which to say one action will universally have the same effect or consequences so you can never say that objectively, throwing a turd at someone's head will be a wrong thing, or that one person firing a gun is good while another is bad (like a police officer compared to a former inmate out on parole who's not supposed to have possession of firearms anyway). That there are gradients in this and that arguments need to be made about what factor might outweigh what consequence is, surprise surprise, largely subjective even if they justify/rationalize it with empirical data. Also as we continue to grow and learn, both the goal posts we thought were set in concrete might shift, and the means by which to attain them correspondingly. And again, by how much? Who decides by how much if it's a subjective choice? Too much grey area here for objectivity to really play a factor except in the bare minimum capacity. Two people can use the exact same piece of objective data to support two different positions. Case in point...the wholly babble.

But, going back to our foundations, because we chose subjectively to say that one thing is preferable to another, where we set the goal posts is also subjective; that we generally consider well-being to be the one to strive for and suffering to be the one to avoid does not mean this is always the case. I know how utterly insane this is but remember, people manage to make this happen whether we like it or not. Apparently god-dick tastes good or something, I wouldn't know. But they have the subjective freedom to insert any alternate 'x' compared to the secular humanist or general well-being model or whatever you want to call it. Whether it's all about god-dick or just a completely rampantly psychotic reversal of well-being and maximum suffering is preferred (I can't help but think of the Joker from The Dark Knight here) there are irrational models one can place into that function f(x) that shift emphasis away from well-being and into utter madness.

Now, if I'm misinterpreting the definitions of anything else, I would appreciate that being pointed out with citations but it seems to me like if there is any objectivity to be had in morality, it's about 15% of the overall equation at most.