I think you're wasting your time. There are those who assert absolutes and ignore the ability of humanity to exert free-will and instead confuse it with freedom of speech. There are those who see the assertion of moral laws as a violation of their free speech and fail to recognize that where there's smoke there's fire. Essentially there are those who's ideas, although well meaning, are thoroughly in denial of human nature and fail to recognize that although there is a moral code at work in our lives there is that capacity within man to ignore it at the expense of others and for their own personal gratification.
Frankly - political, social or moral ideals are worthless if the full range of what humanity is capable of (both good and evid) is not recognized and addressed. Otherwise we'll just continue to learn from the same mistakes so many others have made in the past. I guess history just really is destined to repeat itself.
I'll tell you what's rediculous - to assert a moral law is compared to being a fascist because it limits the "obviously" perverse from their ?fundamental right? to free-speech. Does anyone not see the contradiction in all of that or is it just a juxtaposition?
Probably closer to the latter -- though I prefer to think of it more along the lines of substitution due to pridefulness and denial. Look at the verbal gymnastics we've seen in this thread -- some of it quite remarkable. It pretty much all traces back to one an assumption that God either doesn't exist, or doesn't matter.