... agreed upon "American ideals." Things like tolerance, freedom of religion, equality of opportunity, life, liberty, blah blah blah. Even at the UN, on a global scale, agreement could be reached on human rights. So your point is right, but also ignores these obvious areas where we can talk about morals or values without bringing up religion or faith.

Maybe these do not all fall under the heading "morals," but perhaps under "values."

An important point I would make is that cultures are not static. Our laws must keep pace with our culture lest they become oppressive. Conservatism is naturally at opposition with the normal cultural dynamism, so obviously they should not be the ones deciding.

So who decides? Cultural consensus. Deliberation and debate and argument and discussion and dialogue and compromise. Our courts and legislatures are the governmental incarnations of this process, though the legislatures often have a hard time keeping up. This is why the notion of "activist judges" is absurd. Judges are responsible for making sure our legal system keeps pace with our culture - that is the core of the common law system. Which is why it is conservative judges who are the real danger.

Ok, I've rambled way off topic now... but you got me started and my brain just keeps making connections... I could go on, but I'll spare you.

You're right. The thing isn't that for one person to say what's right or what's wrong. The point is to open up a true dialog about it. One of the problems I have about is when religion becomes a proxy war of sorts about morality.

I don't like proxy wars in any form.

Now, I actually DO have a definition of "right and wrong". It's something I developed over a lot of thinking and reading and discussing. It's a forumla of sorts. But it doesn't tell us what is right or wrong, but what it does is provides a framework for open discussion.

Morality of an action=The effects on other people modified by intentions.

Pretty simple huh? And it's not intended to tell people exactly what to do, but how to think about what they do. And that's the key word. Think.

Now, we can discuss the effects of an action and the intentions all night. And that's the point. We're supposed to do that. I thought that Obama had several chances to do what he did in his DNC speech and get down and dirty into morality, and he really backed away from it at every turn.

Which really disappoints me because I had him pegged as a leader.