Quote Originally Posted by saitenyo View Post
Well, this is all getting into the hypotheticals and technically forcing me to play devil's advocate since it's not actually what I believe. I'm not going to argue in defense of something that I don't personally believe is true. I was just stating that I acknowledge that I cannot empirically prove that it's not true.
Soo.. Why even bring up the topic of a divine moral authority if we agree it's a non-factor..? Anyway, nevermind then.

From what I'm trying to gather (and I might be wrong), the sole detail separating our views is this part which I glossed over a bit too hastily but I'd like to come back to.

Quote Originally Posted by Saitenyo
As for whether or not there are right and wrong answers from a purely objective (or divine) perspective, that I cannot answer. I don't think we have enough information about life/the universe to answer that question.

I do agree, yes. Like I said, I maintain, from my personal perspective, that there are definitive right or wrong answers if morality is based on how the well-being of others has been affected. I think that is something we can judge based on available evidence.
(Some emphasis added to focus the topic a little)
It seems that your view is then almost identical to mine, except you seem to be hesitant about setting any truth-value to your beliefs outside your own perspective. Understandable carefulness.. but I've got nothing better to do, so I'll challenge it anyway :

Is there really any question whether or not morality relates to human and animal well-being? Why do you think we don't have enough knowledge about life and the way conscious entities work to make this conclusion?
Just like with medical sciences, we don't have to competely understand what "perfect health" is in order to make objective decisions regarding to healthcare. We know that health relates to functions of the human body. If someone disagrees, we don't say that they "just have another perspective" of what health is. We simply say that they are wrong and no respectable professional doctor has to take that person seriously.
We don't have to completely understand what "morality" is in it's entirety in order to make objective decisions whether or not a certain action is moral or not. Aside from our own conscious experience, we have thousands of years of history as a social species to look back to in determining that morality does infact relate to human and animal well-being.
Now, when people say things like "Morality actually doesn't relate to human well-being at all, it's actually about this book I have that we should all obey", for some reason it doesn't recieve the same response as when people disagree about the concept of health. I'm saying this is a mental hurdle people need to get over. We are totally justified in saying "No, you don't have 'just another perfectly equal perspective' on this issue. You are wrong about morality".

Just as an example question to prod around a bit outside your own perspective.. Do you think westerners are justified in critiquing Middle-Eastern countries for forcing their women to clothe themselves in burkas? Do you or do you not think it is not our business to meddle into the cultural quirks of other societies?