With respect, I'd like to point out that you're agreeing with my previous post. When you set the standard for morality yourself, it is arbitrary. It will differ between people, between cultures. It may even change over time.
Except that you're saying that the existence of an all powerful ruling deity changes things in some way -- even if we knew the bible was the word of God and taught His morality, it would still be arbitrary.
But if you accept that your morality is no better than his, why would you be offended when Bob revs up his pickup truck to go kitten squishing?
Because I like cats? Because at an emotional
level, seeing a cat be squished would manifest a feeling
of disgust. Morals are a personal feeling - you can't choose to change base emotional responses to the world. Bob, knowing that squishing cats causes so much emotional distress to those around him, Bob should probably compromise in order to avoid conflict with his neighbours.
Such people [who's morals are offended by immoral actions] are being irrational. It might be my moral to be immoral. And since their morality is no better than mine... ah you get the idea.
You're missing the point.
Let's say that a lion's nature is such that if you punch it, it will eat you. This is it's morality.
It doesn't matter if you proclaim that "it's your moral" to punch lions -- the lion will still eat you if you do so. Saying "Oh mr lion, you're being irrational"
isn't going to change the nature of the lion.
In the same way, telling someone that their morality is irrational is not going to change the nature of that person -- the nature to how they respond to the world.
So, no, I don't get the idea because it's flawed. A world where we say "I can do whatever I feel is right, because my right is just as right as your right
" is a world full of people being eaten by lions. You're ignoring the fact that humans are not robots, we're animals, and animals have their own nature.
Instead, we need to balance what we feel is right along with what the rest of the community feels. The community thus has it's own composite morality that is a compromise between it's individuals.
Someone else may well disagree that it is ok to offend someone in France just because they are not a neighbour/peer or friend and be offended at your comment.
You've misread me, it's ok if your actions *would* (hypothetical "would") offend someone on the other side of the planet, because that person is not aware of or affected by your actions
If your actions do affect someone, then you've created conflict.
I have no idea what this has to do with a survey though.