Premise: Objective morals do not exist

Originally posted by @fmf
Because of laws which pertain to moral matters and actions and behaviours attendant thereto.

But you just said that you would reject a law that legalized rape. So you do believe in a law that would supersede the laws of a country?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You said everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If everyone is entitled to their own opinions and morality (being subjective) is only based upon opinions, (with no opinion being any more valid than another) why would anyone not be free to do as they please if there were no objective standard by which to tell which opinions were correct and which weren't?

Morality governs behaviour. Here is an example that addresses your question above. An acquaintance often comes round to my house and expresses opinions about morality that I disagree with - it'd be OK to tell lies about himself to my children - and he considers the contents of my fridge his to eat and drink at will without permission. So far no problem. When he takes action in accordance with these moral opinions, I stop allowing him into my house. If he breaks in to my house to steal stuff, or if he acts bizarrely around my kids in a way that makes me concerned, I may well contact the police.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
But you just said that you would reject a law that legalized rape. So you do believe in a law that would supersede the laws of a country?

I think rape is morally wrong and the same goes for torturing babies for fun. I'd move away from a country that legalized such things because of my moral code.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
I have corrected you multiple times on the issue. I believe getting angry with your brother is sin. As is mass murder. That is all.

You were explicit about them being "equally evil". So have you changed your mind about it?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So therefore you do believe that rape is always wrong regardless of whether a countries laws permit it or not. Which means you do believe in an least one moral absolute even if you won't admit it.

I have addressed this question before. Why are you repeating it? There is nothing I need to "admit".

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So you do believe in a law that would supersede the laws of a country?

What "law"? You mean some superstitious notion about a supernatural being 'passing' "laws"? No. But I have my own moral sensibilities, the source, nature and application of which we have discussed in detail, and they help me to navigate my way through life - to decide what I believe is wrong and right - and to address issues such as crimes and laws and the actions of other people, as well as my own. Do I think there are supernatural "laws"? No, I don't.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If you assume that there is no objective moral code it means no moral code can be superior to another and your code is no better than Hitlers. You are either too blind to see this or too proud to admit this.

This is not true, and it's falseness has been demonstrated to you with inarguable clarity time and time again. It seems unlikely that you are stupid enough to have failed to read or follow the repeated refutations of this point. Why do you persist with this nonsense?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Hitler obeyed the moral standards enshrined in his. What is your objection to that if there is no objective moral law by which you can demonstrate that his morals were wrong?

Citation required: Please provide references demonstrating that Hitler (or any of his government or military officials) thought the 'Final Solution' was morally acceptable behaviour.

Originally posted by @fmf
I think rape is morally wrong and the same goes for torturing babies for fun. I'd move away from a country that legalized such things because of my moral code.

If you believe your moral code is subjective, it means that you believe no actions is ever always wrong because if you did you would then be having an objective moral standard. You do believe that rape and torturing babies is always immoral no matter the circumstances, so therefore you believe in an objective moral standard. It is obvious why you are not willing to admit this.

"Objective moral standards mean that some actions are always immoral no matter the circumstances. "

Originally posted by @fmf
You were explicit about them being "equally evil". So have you changed your mind about it?

If have corrected you on this months ago yet you always pretend to forget for some reason.

Originally posted by @avalanchethecat
This is not true, and it's falseness has been demonstrated to you with inarguable clarity time and time again. It seems unlikely that you are stupid enough to have failed to read or follow the repeated refutations of this point. Why do you persist with this nonsense?

You have yet to demonstrate how one person's opinions on morality can be superior to someone else's opinions if there is no objective standard by which to make that judgement. Is everyone not entitled to their opinion?

Originally posted by @avalanchethecat
Citation required: Please provide references demonstrating that Hitler (or any of his government or military officials) thought the 'Final Solution' was morally acceptable behaviour.

People always justify actions in their mind before they execute them unless they act out of impulse.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If have corrected you on this months ago yet you always pretend to forget for some reason.

I remember you suddenly discarding the assertion in a conversation much later when it was inconvenient to you, yes.

So you accept that you changed your mind at that point, after months of sticking by the "equally evil" assertion", when you now suggest you started 'correcting' me (as opposed to yourself)? Or not?

Dig yourself deeper. I have sent a link to the relevant thread to some other posters so that they can see for themselves, but I've asked them to say nothing and to, instead, simply observe you and your behaviour.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If you believe your moral code is subjective, it means that you believe no actions is ever always wrong because if you did you would then be having an objective moral standard.

No, I don't. It's as if you haven't understood a word I have said to you in 2016 and 2017.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You do believe that rape and torturing babies is always immoral no matter the circumstances, so therefore you believe in an objective moral standard.

My belief that rape and torturing babies is wrong is a subjective opinion. My belief that you raping and torturing babies would be wrong is a subjective one too.