If there are no moral absolutes, then the concept of right and wrong ceases to exist.
Do cloud not exist because one can not define the boarders?
One cannot call morality relative and then make absolute claims about what is right and wrong without contradicting himself.
We don't make absolute claims except within what we, individually, believe to be right and wrong. I say don't rape Suzy because I suspect that she and I are equivalent beings in that we are both sovereign, sentient and conscious. I value these properties in myself and, therefore, assume them valuable in Suzy. It's kind of like a mushroom: Better to assume it's poisonous; major benifit if your right; minor cost if you're wrong.
Were these men capable of distinguishing right from wrong?
If you can't get exactly 32 psi in your tires do you just rip em' off and roll around on the rims? We, mankind, don't have to get it exactly right to recognize the benefit of trying. Clearly we have that going for us.
God is morality.
Did you know that some people, like, 3000 years ago wrote a book about Him that makes Him out to be a real douche-bag? You should set the record straight and let everyone know God is, like, cool, and wouldn't rape Suzy.
Humanity is depraved at its very core.
Speak for yourself, John. So far it's fundamentalism which is depraved at its very core. In our little poll it's come back with abstentions and a "Not unless she's asking for it".
It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say.
Anon