PRINCIPLES AND MORAL RELATIVISM CANNOT CO-EXIST
PRINCIPLES
Some say that principles do not come first and practice is what matters. But to
celebrate the rejection of principles or violence against principles mean you
cannot object if people decide to put their bad principles into practice. Or if
they create new bad principles. You don't say that the principle of paedophilia
being bad is unimportant as long as people don't carry out acts of child sexual
abuse. Your condemnation of their actions only makes you a hypocrite who
tolerates their evil. Principles are not just rules but about people. For
example, if you value truth you automatically value people's need for the truth
and their right to it. Principles consider the bigger picture and look beyond
pleasing some people to what is best for as many people as possible in the
long-term. If you suffer for the truth it will pass and it is worse to give in
to those who hate the truth.
RELATIVISM
Relativism is the view that whatever you think is the truth is the truth and
everybody has their own truth. Moral relativism is the notion that you have a
right to your moral opinion and that nobody should tell you your morality is
immoral or wrong. It rejects the idea that anything is absolutely wrong. But it
contradicts this by saying it's always wrong to say relativism is wrong! It
rejects the idea that morality is fact-based - or objective which means the same
thing. But as we cannot stop thinking of moral right and moral wrong as facts
and they can't stop presenting themselves as facts the relativist is only
trading objective morality for an invented objective morality.
Relativism accuses objective morality of being intolerance but is itself
intolerance. It condemns the view that morality is objective and real. It is not
a proper response to the problem of tolerance. The pope speaks of the
dictatorship of relativism which regards the person who rejects relativism as
intolerant and evil. If a moral fact is a fact then tolerance demands you accept
it. The fact is not intolerant - it is just a default. It is not intolerant for
a tree to be a tree not a pansy. It's just a default - the way it is.
The modern adage, "You have a right to your opinion/belief" is used by those who
think they should think or believe whatever they WANT rather than think or
believe whatever seems TRUE. It's a revolting misuse based on the wish to become
immune to rational argument or persuasion. The only reason you have a right to
your belief or opinion is that you use belief and opinion to find the truth or
to improve your knowledge and accuracy. To say you have the right to believe or
think what you want is ridiculous. It is not about what you want and you have no
right to deceive people that it is. Grow up!
The person who tries to believe what he wants without regard to what is true is
being intolerant of the fact that belief is based on evidence. He is not being
fair or honest in this. He is not being supportive or tolerant towards those who
want to base belief on good reasons. He will fear and tend to be bigoted towards
those who endanger the facade he has created.
People say they have a right to their beliefs and opinions. That is actually a
half truth. The correct thing is to say you have a right to your beliefs and
opinions as long as you see them as helps on the journey to truth. If you say
you have a right to your beliefs and opinions without any concern for truth then
you are not being fair. Fairness is based on what is true. The person who sees
the truth and calls it a lie is being unfair.
A person can claim to be a moral absolutist or to believe in an objective
morality. But a relativist can do that too for they are essentially amoral. It
is probably safe to hold that as Christians are not that obedient to their
version of God that they are relativists and not admitting it. The Epistle of
James says it is only the remarkably religious and obedient who can be
considered to be real people of faith.
Decide: morality is either really true (objective morality) or you can make it
really true (relativism). Relativism trades objective morality for another
objective morality that you make up. Pure relativists do not exist - they just
are relativists when it suits them.