Athiests could you please answer the following for me.....?

Both...but mostly 99% moral relativism.

All depends on context. Every situation is a little different, many variables can come into play.

Use your imagination, just try to think of a situation in which male rape of a female is morally justified.

Is it ever morally justified to intentionally murder a baby? (25 Jews, including children, hiding from Nazi's in a basement, baby begins to cry, baby is smothered to death to save 24 people's lives)

But change that a little...now it is 25 people, one is a toddler, the other 24 are all over 70 years old...would it be more moral for them to intentionally make noise and give themselves up in hope they can hide the toddler?

What if it was 25 Nazi's hiding in a basement with babies and children as hostages and Allied troops are in the house and a baby cries...is it moral for a Nazi to kill the baby to save 25 lives?

Change it up again...is it ever morally justified to intentionally starve a baby to death?

I can think of absolutely NO situation in which it would be morally justified to intentionally starve a baby. By that I mean, food is abundant and the starvation is intentional for whatever sick reason.

But what if food is not abundant and there is a baby, a 2 year old and a 4 year old child and one adult stranded on an island? The adult comes to the conclusion that there is only enough food to last 5 days before they all begin to starve, but if they let the baby starve now the food would extend to 6 or 7 days allowing more time for rescue?

Or let the 2 year old starve since the older kid would eat more than a baby...what would YOU do?

"do you believe that every action has one unique, absolute, and true moral assessment"

For me to believe that would mean I would need to believe in an absolute assessor...something or someone whom I believe should have the final say, be the final authority, over what is and what is not moral in every given circumstance.

No, as it is I believe every individual decides for themselves what is moral and what is immoral. Certainly the Nazi's in the basement killing a baby to save THEIR lives would think their action to be just as moral as the Jews in the basement killing a baby to save their lives would justify the act.

Morality, in the end, is simply a matter of individual human perspective. Culture and Society does help to define morality for all to try to abide by but it is still the individuals choice to accept moral guidelines dictated by society or to reject those morals.

There is moral subjectivity because what moral end goals are not grounded objectively. HOWEVER, if we want to define being moral as contributing to the welfare of the society and community, there is objective way to do that, however the standard itself isnt objective, but not arbitrary. Killing someone is objectively immoral by my standard.

So I guess you could say that I aim for a certain moral objectivity, but I think it would be misleading.

I believe that things such as murder and rape should be considered "evil" in all cultures. However, there are certain things that should be accepted as unique to a persons culture. For example cannibilistic tribes believe in that primarily for religious purposes but it is deemed wrong by most others. Something like that so long as it stays within the tribes should be accepted so long as innocent people who want no part are not unwillingly envolved.

a million) God created this finished universe. c. hell no 2) God in undemanding words created issues previously the large Bang. c. i do not agree 3) i attempt to do in spite of Al-Quran, Bible, or the different Holy Books tell me to do. d. no 4) God created me. c. My mothers and fathers did that, no longer God 5) i believe in my faith. c. no, i do not 6) there is such aspect as Heaven and Hell. c. you ought to be kidding 7) In my faith, there is a few issues that I disagree with. c. no longer some, a lot of them 8) There are more desirable than a million God. c. there is not any God 9) i believe in God. c. No, i do not 10) I nonetheless attempt to do sturdy deeds. a. convinced 11) because God doesn't exist, i do not do sturdy deeds. a. No, i visit nonetheless do sturdy deeds 12) God doesn't have thoughts and emotions. c. God doesn't exist 13) God will in no way get damage (in any meanings). b. i do not agree 14a) (in case you answered a on quantity 12) God gained't get indignant if we do undesirable issues. a. actual b. i'm no longer effective about that c. he will be indignant 14b) (in case you answered b on quantity 12) because God has emotions and thoughts, he's not desirable. a. actual b. i in no way concept about that c. i do not consider that 15) Wether i pray or no longer, my existence is an same. c. convinced, reason God doesn't exist 16) I have a faith. c. i'm an athiest 17) God exists. c. No

I've started this twice and realized I was going to run out of space both times.

Morals are inherent in humans, they are part of our history and part of our nature , we would never have made it out of neolithic without them. The morals we devoloped apply to small groups, the tribe or the nation. They do not automatically apply to everyone .If they did there would be no wars.

I think starting in the mid 1800's that humanity is starting to forget about the small groups and look at the entire race in general and realize that we are all one human race.

spirits don't exist. so good look trying for this spirit process.

"In other words, do you believe that cultures, or even individuals, can define their own rules on what is moral"

yes. morals are different everywhere you go. what is fine in your home, is not fine in mine.

what is okay in your country is not okay in mine.

in my opinion, there can never be anything morally objective other than happiness, because we base our moral views on the typical emotive outcomes that occur from them. for example, a bible literalist might say killing is always wrong, but when there's somebody about to murder you and your friends, "thou shall not kill" for the majority suddenly seems like a terrible idea

Ah, moral relativism seems best. Stealing bread is okay when you're a starving kid on the street, killing is okay when you're defending your family, etc.

I think this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCC3zGYKYPM&feature...

it's too long for to type out but it's not too long to watch. I swear it's like 5 minutes out of your life