Of course, and many hold some races are inferior.
Not even vaguely analogous to this discussion.
You mean because every single person does not see what is self evident it means it is not self evident?
No. Because some people do not see what is visibly, demonstrably, concretely, and scientifically evident to 99.9% of the world, but on the other hand “see”/hear what is absent to 99.9% of the world, and those people we call insane. Stop arguing from straw man principles.
They are absolutes, just as 2+2=4. What I think you are saying is that they are not accepted as absolutes. That has always been the case and always will be the case in many areas.
No, I am saying that the linkages drawn by the Catholic Church are not the same absolute linkages drawn by the rest of the world. The rest of the world does not see “all life” or “all dependent life” or “all stages of human life” to be an absolute which is to be protected in all circumstances. They see some legitimacy to proportionality when it comes to life and lives, thus they are, yes, relativistic in the technical scheme of things regarding weight of importance, actions, decision. They think that morality has a context, and that the context has both objective and subjective components to it.
Part of the problem is this materialistic mind-set that only sees scientific type facts as objective. This is new in terms of the history of the world.
Welcome to the world, sir. However, philosophical premises lost their classification as absolutes quite some time ago, once the idea of one philosophical system being just as valid and just as subjective as another system, was embraced.
The modern bases of philosophy have been influenced by phenomenology, but phenomenology is just as aligned with subjectivity as with “objectivity.”
Finally, when it comes to commonly held principles, the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in particular have been dominated by psychology more than philosophy, including – yes-- scientific understandings and observations regarding the psyche (which is why also phenomenology took hold in Germany and France), and contemporary advances in brain research. This has elevated the importance of (individual) perception as it relates to an understanding of truth, or commonly held assumptions.
To me – even without my Catholic training – it is patently obvious that there is a God, and I could even limit my “personal proof” of that to my individual experience, verified by others’ similar & identical individual experiences. (I’m very much a Marcelian and a Chardinian in that regard.) But it is my brain receptors that may make all the difference (scientists may tell me), in that two people growing up in the same environment, exposed to the same influences, may and do draw different conclusions about reality, given their brain configurations. This explains why I, and others, have siblings that are agnostics and atheists.
