Relativism is really only a good idea at most and untenable and contranatural at least. One can claim that another can believe whatever he likes, but the moment that freedom granted to another is used to impinge on what the one is comfortable with, feelings of what’s right and wrong come out. In other words, it can be claimed that another can believe what he likes but when those beliefs are acted out much to the claimant’s chagrin, a truly unrevelativistic this-is-right-and-that-is-wrong feeling pops up.
For example, a Christian attempts to pray for the food of everyone seated around a table at a restaurant, but not everyone is a Christian, nor is everyone comfortable with prayer. It is verbally proffered that the one offering to pray for everyone’s food simply pray to himself in place of having everyone stop to pray. Additionally, it is interjected, “Yeh, keep that shit to yourself.”
Fair enough, if you believe that one should not pray for other’s food at a restaurant, then say that you think that’s wrong and admit that there is such a thing as wrong. The contranatural inconsistency reveals itself in the interjection when the one objecting also holds to moral relativism. For, surely, if the Christian wants to pray for everyone’s food, his belief should be respected and not rejected in order to be consistent with moral relativism. Moral relativism is betrayed in the interjection.
