A Deteriorating State :: Morality in the 21st Century

I think you've lost me along the way, Jon. Are you asking, What's the difference between (a liberal and a religous) fundamentalist? or are you asking, what's the difference between a (liberal) and a (religeous fundamentalist)?in other words:
Liberal Vs Religeous fundamentalist
or
Liberal fundamentalist vs religeous fundamentalist

This raises an interesting philosophical question.Were past actions immoral if the morality of the time didn't proclaim them so?For example: Let's say it's the 50's and homosexuality is solidly "immoral" by the standards of the day. From their perspective ancient Greece was a hotbed of immorality. But from the standards of the ancient Greeks, it was no big deal.Can we really judge past cultures for "immoral" acts if they themselves do not recognize the acts as immoral?

While I am no fan of religeous fundamentalism, I don't think it necessarily causes a deterioration of moral values in an of itself.I think fundamentalism causes moral stagnation, often with no rhymn or reason to their stead fast rulings.So, for example, as we as a society move forward on issues of sexuality - the fundamentalists won't budge an inch.But their view point isn't adding to the amount of immorality, it's just unwilling to be swayed.However, one thing that fundamentalism does breed is this culture of non-thinking sheep willing to believe anything they are told and follow any instruction no matter how absurd.That sort of blind obedience necessarily creates leaders who's absolute power and "moral authority" quickly become corrupt.In that way fundamentalism enables individuals who are themselves ruthlessly immoral.

***I acknowledge that what follows is a ridiculously over simplified historical timeline***We might, but are we saying that the Greeks had a high moral standard, then during the Dark Ages we plunged into a low moral standard, and the 50's sit someone along the incline back out of the pit?