Liberal Atheist: It is wrong to condemn homosexuality as sinful and unnatural!
Conservative: Why is it wrong? My church says it is the right thing to do.
Liberal Atheist: Your church’s backward cultural background has skewed your perception. It is clear that condemning people’s lifestyle choices is ethically wrong and immoral from an absolute standpoint.
Conservative: But what about condemning my opinions? What about my right to free speech?
Liberal Atheist: Look, it is clearly wrong to hold bigoted opinions like yours.
Conservative: And where did you get your convictions from? Would it happen to be your culture?
Liberal Atheist: Maybe so. But my convictions are correct!
Conservative: I can claim that mine are too. What makes your culture automatically any more correct? Aren’t all cultures ‘equal’ according to your own multicultural tolerance and political correctness?
Liberal Atheist: Fine. You have a right to your own interpretation, but you are wrong.
Conservative: 2 billion Communists say I am right. Most Christian groups say I am right. Muslims say I am right too. Those two groups add around another 2 billion. And most of the traditional societies across the world, even today. That’s a few dozen to your one. Your culture seems to be the odd one out, and therefore likely wrong.
Liberal Atheist: My culture is far superior to those backward ones!
Conservative: So you’re saying that, based on your opinion and nothing else, you are correct and I am wrong?
Liberal Atheist: I know you are wrong.
Liberal Atheist: Because the conscience I have tells me so. I can feel that your bigoted views are wrong!
Conservative: Well, my conscience tells me the opposite. I can feel it too. What criteria makes your opinion or ‘feeling’ any more correct or inassailable than mine? Let me just ask you, aren’t you a human just like me? Just a product of random evolution, as you like to claim?
Liberal Atheist: Yes.
Conservative: Then what makes you any superior to me… Are you a higher life form with superior DNA, Mr. Magneto?
Liberal Atheist: Lay off the sarcasm! You get your so-called morals from an obsolete book of religious myths and lies.
Conservative: And where do you get yours? From your own reading and talks with like-minded peers?
Liberal Atheist: Yes. From debating and weighing the issues based on naturalistic and atheistic principles – not on the rantings of some ancient scam artists, that you were dogmatically indoctrinated in as a child during Sunday School brainwashings.
Conservative: Naturalistic and atheistic? That is to say, the culture that you grew up in, were indoctrinated in and adopted the dogma of?
Liberal Atheist: Well… It’s a logical and progressive mindset that…
Conservative: So why is your culture automatically more correct than mine? What absolute standard are you judging our cultures by?
Liberal Atheist: Um… It’s correct because… Of advances in ethical theory…
Conservative: And that, you see, is the problem with not having an absolute standard to judge by. Religious nuts like me at least can claim to mindlessly obey an infinite God who chose the rules – regardless of the everchanging culture or human opinion of the time. We can’t modify the rules of morality He made, any more than we can defy the rules of physics He also made. Our opinions or cultural beliefs have no say in changing these absolute laws.
Liberal Atheist: That’s tyrannical.
Conservative: As for you, you have no right to judge that your culture’s moral opinions are any better than the opinions of Christians, Muslims, traditional societies or… Me! The standards of relative morality have changed over time according to which cultural norms are in place. I ask you, wasn’t homosexuality considered a travesty in the past?
Liberal Atheist: Yes, but that was because they were unenlightened! They also considered women and blacks inferior.
Conservative: I agree that they were wrong to discriminate based on gender or race. So the cultural opinions of the past are wrong and your cultural opinions today are correct?
Liberal Atheist: Yes, exactly! We have finally reached the stage where we can be ethically fair and unbiased. Totally unbigoted!
Conservative: But isn’t that a supremely arrogant assumption? Isn’t that probably exactly what the ancient cultures thought of themselves?
Liberal Atheist: But they were obviously wrong…
Conservative: I mean, we haven’t gone all the way yet on the personal freedoms scale. We’ve granted women, blacks and gays equal rights, but what about the other people who are still rejected by society at large? Let me ask you, how about incest? Why do you continue to discriminate against incestuous relationships, if you’re so ‘enligtened’ and ‘freedom loving’?
Liberal Atheist: How uneducated and ignorant are you? Incest results in birth defects due to the closely related genes! It is for humanitarian reasons that we consider incest to be morally wrong.
Conservative: Ah, but it seems that you are the uneducated and ignorant one here. Research shows that children born from incestuous relationships are only about as likely to have birth defects as those born from 40-year old women. Are you going to ban middle aged women from having children too, on ‘humanitarian’ grounds?
Liberal Atheist: Well… There’s the emotional abuse of power issue if it’s between a parent and a child…
Conservative: I’ll cut both that argument and the previous one about birth defects short. What about two adult, similar-aged siblings of the same gender engaging in incest, hm? Can you condemn that on any valid grounds? That avoids any pregnancy or power abuse issues.
Liberal Atheist: I suppose that I can’t. Let them have it their way then, if they’re both mature and willing individuals.
Conservative: And yet, even liberals balk at the idea of incest – even if they have no humanist basis for rejecting it. Isn’t that discrimination against sexual choices right there?
Liberal Atheist: Okay, so fine. Modern society is not perfectly fair and unbiased yet – but it eventually will be! Whereas religious dogma like yours is static and stubborn with its so-called ‘absolute’ morals handed down by some imaginary being to some charlatan thousands of years ago! At least we can evolve – your ancient beliefs will eventually die out.
Conservative: All right, I’ll give you that religion’s absolute morals are incapable of ‘evolving’. But is that a bad thing? Can you tell me, by your standards, what is wrong with bestiality? Won’t society ‘progress’ to the point where one day, sex with animals is considered an inassailable human right? And the culture of the future will condemn today’s culture for persecuting zoophiliacs.
Liberal Atheist: Your argument is totally flawed, as animals cannot make concious decisions – any more than a child can. What, are you going to support paedophilia next?
Conservative: But that’s just the level of research so far… In the future, what if they find that dogs or chimpanzees or dolphins are sentient enough to consent to sex with humans in a way that is not controlled solely by instinct? A concious decision? Then wouldn’t it be wrong to deny them the free choice to have sex with willing humans?
Liberal Atheist: You’re nuts. Sick and disgusting.
Conservative: And your culture will be considered backwards and unenlightened. Whereas, even a thousand years from now, religious believers like me will still say: “It is wrong to have sex with animals, because God says so!” It won’t matter to us what the prevailing culture is like, or how much it condemns or assails us – bestiality will be as detestable in our sight as it has been for three thousand years. And we won’t give a Moonbat’s a$$ what the day’s fad culture says about us. Just like we don’t now.
Liberal Atheist: Cuh! I can see that, you fundie bigot.
Conservative: Your culture is fleeting, your opinions finite. And so are mine – so neither of us has any absolute advantage over the other. But God’s will is forever and His opinions infinite. They are the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. And even if those are just my opinions, by the standards of relative morality no one can say I am definitely wrong. Least of all you.
See also this satire for the logical conclusion of relative morality.
From Diversity Lane: