Moral Relativism Vs. The Golden Rule…

My classes have started at Immaculata University and I’m really digging the Christian Ethics class I’m currently involved in. Below is an excerpt from a posting I did in regards to the myth of moral relativism, as proposed by the author, Jonathan Dolhenty.

I agree with the author of this article that morality cannot be observed by proponents of relativism. Relativists do not believe that there is any one truth that binds us all together, but I’d like to propose at least one TRUTH that has historically done so…The Golden Rule. No matter if you’re Christian, Buddhist, Jew, Muslim, or Atheist, this ethical treaty would not be able to coexist with the theories of true relativism. As this essay so wonderfully pointed out, relativists want us to believe “what is good for you may not be good for me” and “everything is permitted”, if that so happens to float your boat, but how many of them would willingly subject themselves to being treated horrifically by another human being? The answer is probably close to none of them! This is why I believe that there has to be at least one ethic or principal that can be considered absolute. Relativism would negate the Golden Rule because sensitivity (empathy) to others is not a concern, thus unmasking hypocrisy, as all want to be treated with dignity and respect, even those that believe the selfish notion of “anything goes”.