I am trying to find an angle where it could be reasonably argued that this is not wrong. I wouldn't have to agree with it (obviously), that's not the point!
Is there a argument to say that genocide might not be wrong?
God operates on a different system of morality. For the sake of this conversation, he doesn't count.
A moral absolute is not defined as something that no-one would ever do. There have been genocides in human history (as we know), and for the purposes of this exercise, what we need to establish is :
"is there a reasonable moral or ethical argument that could be posited to justify any given action?"
If there is, then it is not a moral absolute.
It is, of course, still subjective. There is no ultimate arbiter. Which kind of goes back (loosely) to the OT!
It is wrong to commit genocide.
I am trying to find an angle where it could be reasonably argued that this is not wrong. I wouldn't have to agree with it (obviously), that's not the point!
Is there a argument to say that genocide might not be wrong?
I believe it's wrong to commit genocide too; although some Africans would disagree. Hitler would too, and many others :P
God would disagree!
God operates on a different system of morality. For the sake of this conversation, he doesn't count.
A moral absolute is not defined as something that no-one would ever do. There have been genocides in human history (as we know), and for the purposes of this exercise, what we need to establish is :
"is there a reasonable moral or ethical argument that could be posited to justify any given action?"
If there is, then it is not a moral absolute.
It is, of course, still subjective. There is no ultimate arbiter. Which kind of goes back (loosely) to the OT!