Was watching a debate between a Muslim and an atheist. And the Muslim make the argument that people that believe in subjective morality have no foundation for making moral judgements and are therefore not valid. Whereas people with a foundation in objective morality, meaning God as the moral judge are because this gives them a foundation for their morality.
Do you agree with this, that without God there is no moral foundation for judging right from wrong? And therefore people not believing in objective morality is not allowed or invalid when judging others?
The problem is easy to solve.
viole was born with the gift of perfectly knowing right from wrong, and therefore everything she says is morally objective.
Evidence? Same as Allah doing the same.
Joking aside, the claim does not obtain necessarily.
The fact that X does not have a source of objectivity, does not entail that we cannot have opinions, even strong opinions, about X. There are many examples of such X, and no rational reason why morality cannot be one of them.
Another killer: religion experiences and beliefs are ultimately subjective. Therefore the objectivity of what they entail is illusory, because they derive from a subjective premise. In other words, the Muslim, by demoting what is subjective, undermines his own theism, and therefore, the very source that intends to give objectivity to morality.
So, to say that X is objectively right, because I believe in a source of objective morality, has the same depth as saying that Kryptonite exists objectively, because I believe in Superman.