WHo are the terrorists?

[Sculptor]

You above is going haywire.
Run out of valid points to counter my specific views?

In Veritas Aequitas we have a pitch perfect example why "objective morality" is a bankrupt idea.

Since the early days of philosophy at least as far back as Plato, notional ideas of objectivity have been applied to moral thinking.
As a result "moral objectivism" has been used to justify slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state). Now we see in his words yet another example of Objective Morality being used to justify ethnic cleansing, starvation and genocide.
Here moral objectivism is being used to ignore the subjectivists plea to apply some sort of mitigation.

So for the babies murdered by Israel I am going to suggest that they not be blamed for act of other people.
Sadly objectivism places the new born as guilty as anyone else.

[Veritas Aequitas]

You above is going haywire.
Run out of valid points to counter my specific views?

In Veritas Aequitas we have a pitch perfect example why "objective morality" is a bankrupt idea.

Since the early days of philosophy at least as far back as Plato, notional ideas of objectivity have been applied to moral thinking.
As a result "moral objectivism" has been used to justify slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state). Now we see in his words yet another example of Objective Morality being used to justify ethnic cleansing, starvation and genocide.
Here moral objectivism is being used to ignore the subjectivists plea to apply some sort of mitigation.

So for the babies murdered by Israel I am going to suggest that they not be blamed for act of other people.
Sadly objectivism places the new born as guilty as anyone else.

You are kicking your own ass.

Moral Objectivism or realism mean there are objective moral facts which are independent of one subject's opinion, beliefs and judgment.
So objectivity is conditioned upon a collective-of-subjects.

Morality is general is 'the good over evil'.

In general where has
slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state)
been universally accepted as good?
Your thinking the above is related to 'morality' show your bankruptcy and lack of moral compass, i.e. you have a moral deficit in your cognition.
Show me references where Plato accepted the above acts as good or moral?

Moral subjectivism or moral relativism is the tolerance and respecting of different ideologies of morality, i.e. to each its own.
Thus a moral subjectivist or relativist will accept the above " slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state)" as moral, so, by definition has to tolerate [mitigate] and has no say when others wrongly termed 'what is evil' as "moral".

So, if the Nazi, Hamas, and others define genocide of their enemies as moral, you the moral subjectivist or relativist will have to accept their genocides and has no say [indirectly condone and is complicit] in what they do.

Therefore, as moral subjectivist or relativists, you are promoting evil, and you are inherently evil-laden.

Don't handwave, give me your rational counters to the above.
(I don't believe you are capable)

[Sculptor]

You above is going haywire.
Run out of valid points to counter my specific views?

In Veritas Aequitas we have a pitch perfect example why "objective morality" is a bankrupt idea.

Since the early days of philosophy at least as far back as Plato, notional ideas of objectivity have been applied to moral thinking.
As a result "moral objectivism" has been used to justify slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state). Now we see in his words yet another example of Objective Morality being used to justify ethnic cleansing, starvation and genocide.
Here moral objectivism is being used to ignore the subjectivists plea to apply some sort of mitigation.

So for the babies murdered by Israel I am going to suggest that they not be blamed for act of other people.
Sadly objectivism places the new born as guilty as anyone else.

(I don't believe you are capable)

Says the man who thinks raping pregnant women and shooting goats is morally justified.

[Veritas Aequitas]

In Veritas Aequitas we have a pitch perfect example why "objective morality" is a bankrupt idea.

Since the early days of philosophy at least as far back as Plato, notional ideas of objectivity have been applied to moral thinking.
As a result "moral objectivism" has been used to justify slavery, capital punishment, land theft, torture, Feudalism, state control of religion (more particularly religious control of the state). Now we see in his words yet another example of Objective Morality being used to justify ethnic cleansing, starvation and genocide.
Here moral objectivism is being used to ignore the subjectivists plea to apply some sort of mitigation.

So for the babies murdered by Israel I am going to suggest that they not be blamed for act of other people.
Sadly objectivism places the new born as guilty as anyone else.

(I don't believe you are capable)

Says the man who thinks raping pregnant women and shooting goats is morally justified.

How is that your skull is so thick that you cannot read and comprehend what I wrote?

I have repeated this many times:
My principle: whatever are immoral acts by Israel, Palestinians and whoever [in the world], they must be addressed and dealt accordingly by the appropriate laws and handled morally. [i.e. immoral acts are never morally justified]

What happened to your comprehension.

I say again;
As a moral Subjectivist or moral relativist by definition, you must respect and tolerate the moral views of others even if to them genocides and other evil acts are deemed to be moral within their morality.
So you do not have a moral say in the genocides committed by Hamas, Nazi or whatever immoral acts committed by IDF because you MUST tolerate their moral views.

By definition as moral Subjectivist or moral relativist you MUST SHUT UP in the moral context in condemning ISRAEL, Hamas or anyone committing immoral acts.
You can condemns evil acts within the common sense, political, social but NEVER under the moral ambit.

[Atla]

I say again;
As a moral Subjectivist or moral relativist by definition, you must respect and tolerate the moral views of others even if to them genocides and other evil acts are deemed to be moral within their morality.
So you do not have a moral say in the genocides committed by Hamas, Nazi or whatever immoral acts committed by IDF because you MUST tolerate their moral views.

And with that, VA has fully signed himself out of the civilized world.

[Sculptor]

(I don't believe you are capable)

Says the man who thinks raping pregnant women and shooting goats is morally justified.

How is that your skull is so thick that you cannot read and comprehend what I wrote?

it is what you believe.