Are Moral Values Subjective?

May 12, 2019 Robert Arvay

We are told, by the Left, that matters of right and wrong are situational. They change with the times, with cultures, or with other conditions. They reject the idea that there are eternal, objective standards to which we are all obliged to conform, regardless of our personal opinions or preferences.

I recall having seen online a videotaped debate on this between two teams of participants. One of them included a prominent atheist (either Hitchens or Dawkins), while the other team was composed of recognized advocates of religious values.

The reason I was searching for the video is because I remember that, throughout the debate, the atheist side of it centered on claims that they are supported by science, not by opinion and not by faith.

Then a curious thing happened. Near the end of his presentation, one of the supposedly scientific atheists launched into a tirade against people who oppose same-sex "marriage." This was one of the same people who had been asserting that questions of morality are entirely subjective, with no basis in science. Obviously, this esteemed scientific atheist did not really believe his own pronouncements. He did not disbelieve in morality; he simply believed in his own version of it. As do so many others on the social Left, he seemed to believe that his standards should be enforced on the rest of us.

Judging from this, most people seem to intuitively believe that there really is such a thing as morality. We just disagree on which standards, if any, to uphold. So the question becomes more important: is there an objective, perhaps scientific, standard of morality independent of our personal opinions?,,,,,,,,,,Read more