Being repetitive and rude and unwilling to defend your proposed alternative is not quite the same thing as "ripping to shreds with logic". Tell me again how the Bible does not support slavery. I somehow missed that lecture.
Since you can not find any logical or practical fault with moral absolutism, you are only left with attempting to defend your moral systems against logical attack.
Oh, indeed. Apprently, I also missed the lecture where you defended the genocide of the anabaptists by the Pope and Martin Luther. Perhaps you could give me a posting reference?
When all else fails, accuse me of being rude. I am direct, yes, rude, no. I can be rude, but I try to refrain. However, I am direct, and respond to the issues the best I can. If you feel I am rude, I am sorry, I am who I am. I don't go out of my way to injure people's feelings, but I also refuse to walk on egg shells with people. If you don't like my style and arguing method, stop responding to my posts. I won't miss you. No one is holding a gun to your head.
Do you think that just because I don't answer, I don't have one. The reason I didn't answer is that I have nothing to prove to you, but now that you seem to have a triumphant attitude over my silence, I will answer. First, give me the precise verse where slavery is condoned or encouraged in the bible. Good luck - you won't be able to find it. FACT: The bible reports slavery and instructs slaves and masters to love each other but it does not condone it or encourage it. This is simply one more instance of a priori anti-Christian bias (in lieu of honest investigation) from a confirmed skeptic. QUESTION: Do you know the difference between chattel slavery and bond servanthood? Which one was practiced in ancient israel? Also, tell me, when Paul told slaves in the Roman empire to love their masters and masters to love their slaves, what do you think is the end result of that? Instead of Paul demanding that slavery end, he did better! - he demanded in the name of Christ that they love each other. Finally, who was it that ended chattel slavery in the west? Christians! Ever heard of William Wilberforce? How about the Christian abolitionists in the United States? I'm waiting for that verse, and I must caution you about context, as you do not strike me as one who understands the science of biblical hermeneutics.
This is not an argument against moral absolutism, but is simply a commentary on the evil deeds of men. The popes were wicked and that had nothing to do with Jesus Christ or moral absolutes. In fact, moral absolutes were violated by the leaders of the Inquisition and Crusades. That is the difference between these examples in Christianity and Islam. The islamic terrorists' actions DO COINCIDED with the example of their founder, while the evil popes' actions do not coincide with the example of Jesus Christ. Again, I ask you for any logical argument against moral absolutism. I have come up with more than one good argument against utilitarianism that you cannot answer, but you have not come up with one against absolutism.