I'd advise people to not waste their time here. This guy isn't interested in a debate but perpetuating a narrative. IIRC he's actually been banned before, perhaps I'm wrong.
I'm going to take this as Libel, as you're making claims/knowledge to my Mind/Intents.
Also, answer the topic.
I don't think anyone can convince you either way
You didn't even answer the questions, and you're assuming you "can't convince me" a cop out as you clearly cannot answer any of the questions, you evaded them in the worst most detectable ways imaginable.
You never answered What makes something Objectively Right or Wrong, all you did was repeat that Humans have Morals, of course they do, that's not the question, the question was What makes something Objectively Right or Wrong?
Very rudimentary question.
The consequences of Natzi ideology are objective (their actions will lead to consequences) and how we view them is not.
All Actions lead to a Consequence/Effect.
"How we view them is not"
How you view something has nothing to do with Objective Morality.
Hitler viewed what he did as right, yet it was Objectively Wrong.
Untenable for making the claim that my values are objective features of the universe maybe.
It doesn't make morality pointless, it means it is based upon human judgment.
I don't think human judgment is pointless at all, I think it is one of the most important things we do.
Human Judgement is Subjective. One person could think what Hitler did was right while another person can think he was wrong.
If you have no Objective Standard, then you have no Right and Wrong, and anything could be Right and Wrong, erasing the use of the very words.
Subjective Morality is simply untenable.
No, it would be wrong because we think it is wrong and don't like those consequences.
Nazi's would think it's Right and they would Actually like the consequences, so according to your argument it would be Right.
See how your argument/subjective morality doesn't work?
Objective morality is defined by innate social morality. Besides that I don't know what kind of answer to "what makes something objectively right or wrong" you want.
Of course Objective Moral Values are Innate, that's not the question and it doesn't answer the question,
The question is: What makes something Objectively Right or Wrong?
Very rudimentary.
How is simply answering the question a crutch for atheism?
#1, You never answered What makes something Objectively Right or Wrong, Asserting what we already know, that Moral is innate, doesn't tell us what Makes those Innate Moral Values Objective.
#2, Under Atheism there's no such thing as Objective Morality, you pretend as if there is Objective Morality in your worldview as a crutch, as your worldview is untenable.
Yes. And I assert that you, if you consider carefully, think the same.
Your worldview is therefore
If objective morality does not exists, there is nothing to make something objectively right or wrong.
Meaning your worldview is devoid of Morality as there would be No Objective Right or Wrong, Right or Wrong under your worldview could be anything. rendering Morality imaginary.
That atheistic worldview is nowhere found in Reality.
I know that objective morality does not exist. Every "objective moral" that people claim can be shown to be subjective / intersubjective and situational.
Then by all means prove Morality is Subjective and Not Objective as you claim.
