Objective morality as a proper basic belief

[Astonished]

Your preference or desire doesnt make something right or wrong.

This is a strawman. Morality can be arrived at through means of reason rather than emotion, so long as we regard the good life as axiomatic.

I will assume that you, as a Christian, do regard the sanctity of life as axiomatic. Correct if me if I'm wrong on either count.

---

Try extrapolating it out to different nations and maybe that will help, and remove god from the equation (although Israeli schoolchildren were tested in this way and said it wasn't wrong for a god-backed army to do the same thing as a Chinese army that they did consider wrong). Is it wrong for X nation to gas the minority population that disagrees with the ruling party, but not for Y nation to do the same? If not then there's no way to justify any other party's immunity to this. Distinctions destroy the entire argument.

I think it's wrong for any nation to gas any minority population for any reason.  But that's just me. Clearly the Germans didn't think the same in WWII ... and they were overwhelmingly Christian.

What, again, was your point? That morality is objective based on how we know what we know?

Fact is, humans most often adjudge the morality of any action 1) based on how they sit in the equation, 2) how creepy it makes them feel, and 3) how they've been programmed by their societies.

All three aspects speak to subjectivity.

Rather than toss about spurious crap, make your case for moral objectivity plainly. Quit muddying the waters, and clarify the conversation, if you'd be so kind.

Fuck, dude, you bit my head off for no reason. I'm piggybacking off of what was already said, otherwise I'd have written a hell of a lot more. I'm just saying if you can't justify a moral exemption between any two groups, there's no defense for any other groups so to try and give god a free pass is just ludicrous and not only undermines any absolute morality, but verifies that any biblical-based morality is just as spurious as you accused me of being. Saying one group has X attribute that gives it an exemption is preposterous if the concern is the consequences and not the identity or characteristic of the agents involved.