moral confusion in the name of science

some notes:

morals come from an awareness of how biologically complex a creature is and how able it is to experience happiness and sorrow.

just because a definition is open for revision doesnot make it vacuuous

equivalent peaks.

the fact that there are more than one right answer does not mean there is no point in following them

consider food. there is no one-right food, but there are healthy foods, and they are distinct from poison

the fact that there is not right answer about what is the only right food to eat, does not tempt us to draw the conclusion that there are truths to be known about human nutrition

may people worry universal morality creates moral precepts that emit of no exception.
if its wrong to lie, than it should always be wrong to lie, if you can find an exception there is no such thing as moral truth
but consider chess's don't lose your queen. sometimes its a good idea, sometimes its the only good idea

who are we to judge battery acid on woman for not wearing burkha is bad.

WHO ARE WE NOT TO JUDGE! who are we to pretend that we no so little about human well-being that we have to be nonjudgemental about a practice like this?