args

There are universal, objective moral values

I'm glad Con finally put forward terms and definitions critical to his debate. Objective: “... based on facts; unbiased.” Value: “relative worth, merit, or importance...” Con went on to say, “There is no Objective: “... based on facts; unbiased.” Value: “relative worth, merit, or importance...” Con went on to say, “There is no universal objective criteria that applies to all things which can be used to decide whether something is morally right or wrong.” “A universal objective criteria that applies to all” groups is the “universal objective moral value” of “thou shall not kill” each other within the group; otherwise, there is no group. Since we have a diversity of separate social groups, having their own culture throughout the world and history, is testimony of clear empirical evidence of a “universal objective moral value, of “thou shall not kill” each other within the group. Life outside the group, typically other species, is food to sustain the group--bon appetite! Con went on to say, “In fact, the world would have 100% less suffering if I just destroyed the entire solar system.” A typical “Hitler” mentality in conquest to destroy other social groups with some self-proclaim righteous dogma. How obtuse, a clear example of one who does not understand morality. Many are not “suffering,” in fact, having a great moral time, while keeping their social groups alive by not killing each other. Life is great!