FWIW, I don't agree that we aren't able to determine what is objective as a society, but I'm not able to put my thumb on exactly why just now. Definitely need to think on this a while.

Exactly.

It is true that the God of the OT ordered the destruction of a nation of people on numerous occations. However is it murder for God to do with His creation as He pleases? Especially when His creation is rebelling against His commands doesn't God have the right to punish His creation? One example is the flood: 5And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
I think that is where the confusion lies, killing someone isn't murder if it is a punishment of a crime.

I think the confusion lies in my understanding of 'Objective' vs 'Subjective'.

For instance, I would consider the kidnap, rape, and murder of a 10yo girl to be wrong at any time and circumstance. If we stipulate that this is so, what is left to the subjective? God never enters the equation.

I consider killing to be wrong, but can imagine a time a circumstance where it is not wrong. Killing Nazi soldiers seems like a good example in light of this thread. This is, therefore, subjective. Still, God is not necessary.

This may be the case. In the context of this argument, objectivity has to mean absolute objectivity.

Sometimes objectivity is used in degree. "I can see both sides of a situation, so I am objective." This is not absolute objectivity.

I have problems using the word(s) right and wrong. Instead I say I prefer not to kidnap, rape, murder etc....

Somepeople may find kidnap, rape and murder all fun things to do, and to them it would not be wrong. Like everything it depends.

Would you think that marrying an eight year old girl and having sex with her in any society be considered rape? Can you think of a situation where this is okay? I am curious with your opinion on such a case.

So are you saying there are no moral absolutes?

I dont think "morals" exists. Its a man made concept. I dont have the power to tell another man what to do, and therein lies the conundrum. Whoever has the power can get to do whatever they want.

So what you are saying is that if I have the power/wealth/influence to get away with murder, say...killing you for example, there is nothing wrong with that, am i correct to make this assumption?

Yes 100%. What world have you been living in.

The person who rapes and kills a girl has the power over that girl.
The gov. who puts that person in jail has the power over that man.
The USA gov. goes to war, kills a bunch of innocent people, call it collateral damage, makes it okay, because they have power to do that.
When Al-Qaeda do it, its called terrorism because thats the spin the US put on it. They have power to do so.

Name me something where this doesnt happen, what world are you living in?

Oh, I'm not saying that doesn't happen, I totally 100% agree that things like this happen. I'm just saying that I am able to object to such things happening and labelling such heinous acts as evil. I believe in moral absolutes, whether they are upheld or not doesn't change the fact that something is wrong. I'm glad though that you, as an atheist, can make the logical conclusions that comes with the idea of atheism. You as an atheist live with an idea of no moral absolutes. I on the other hand, as a theist, believe in moral absolutes. Because of our conflicting ideas of morals, or if they even exist, we will have to agree to disagree.

Ugh...

Then why do you claim earlier ITT that the Holocaust is subjectively wrong?

Man, I am so confused by you sometimes. Are you saying that the rape and murder of the girl is ok simply because someone can? You're gonna drive me back to faking theism just because stuff like this scares the **** outta me.

As someone who does not believe in the Christian god or other specific god, nor do I believe morals are from God, I'm completely opposed to your position.

Yeah.

2.32 - 2.35

http://youtu.be/YRK541tosfI

LMAO, what other conclusion you expect him to come to? Atheism produces these kind of beliefs...or is it the other way around, maybe its both.

I am not an atheist, I am a nihilist.

How are you as 1 person able to object to anything? Let me guess you vote once a year about how often the bins need to be collected or some minor stuff like that. Do you think YOU make any difference. I can picture you now going around pointing to everyone "look how evil you are" bouncing around from place to place, having no affect on any outcome. The best thing you got going is the mob mentality, just go with the ground, agree to whatever they say, blend into the background.

Am i saying I don't do wrong? Absolutely not! To answer your 1st question, very easily. My objection isn't based on what society thinks though, its based on what God commands. It is extremely easy for me to object when I believe in moral absolutes.

Do you think telling lies is wrong? What about
stealling? Lets say someone was broke and homeless
he holds an absolute moral that stealling is wrong
he has no other way of getting food other than
to steal it. According to you and himself he has to strave to death.

According to the Bible stealing is wrong whether you are starving or not. Whats interesting with your example is that it is mentioned in the Bible. If someone stole from you, he became your slave to work off the debt. While he works off his debt however, you must feed him and provide him shelter. After his debt is paid off he may choose to remain your slave so that he can continue working for you and at the same time have his basic human needs tended to by his master.

Seeing as spending his time studying/learning such material will undoubtedly come at the cost of spending his time allocating his resources to people most in need. Wouldn't seeking to aquire such knowledge come at an expensive human cost?

It certianly seems to me that seeking to re-learn his beliefs and morals through study in the aim to salvage himself, seems extremly selfish.

Thats okay I just pay my slave $1 a week and make him
do hard larbour and charge him for the glass
of water and bread I give him. Can you see what's
happening here I have the power over him
and get to tell how it "ought" to be in other
words the way I prefer it.

Wow, you would pay your slave $1 a week? In biblical times they weren't paid at all, all their needs were met however and they were treated well if they had righteous, God-fearing masters. Yes, you do have power over your slave, that is the nature of owning slaves... All this seems so simple to me. Slavery isn't something wrong, slavery in the context of abusive masters...I can see why this doesn't seem like a pleasant/just thing.

But I charge him for the food and water.

Well I'm sure the $$ cancels out the food :P.

Not really I charge him $10 for a glass of water
and the same for the bread.