Ordinarily, I don't find much in the The New York Times that interests me, but this opinion written by Justin P. McBrayer is an exception.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com//2015/03/02/why-our-children-dont-think-there-are-moral-facts/

I found these passages particularly interesting:

a very interesting article.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what is a moral fact? One's morals may not he mine. Im not condoning immorality, I just dont understand what moral could be stated as fact.

The basics I'd say whould be truth, honor, loyaty and knowing right from wrong..

What about, "It is wrong to forcibly sodomize an infant child."

That sounds like a statement of moral fact - i.e., it is absolutely, undeniably immoral regardless of time, place, actors, reasons, etc. To deny that it is not a statement of moral fact is to suggest that such an act could be deemed morally acceptable in one context or another. I would caution anyone to suggest such a thing, if for no other reason than you would come across as a warped, depraved human being.

Certain things are universal, they are things that should happen simply because they are the correct thing to do. Not murdering, not stealing, not raping, etc... you might even call this sort of thing "Natural Law".

Then you have morals that vary based on culture, religion, etc...gender identity, homosexual relations, multiple spouses, open marriages, interracial marriage, etc... those are morals that can be soundly debated against the backdrop of natural law and are not constant.

Don't listen to this guy. He thinks morality is lubing up the goat before party time.

To use the article writer's method on his topic:
By what reasoning is the claim quoted above (that value and moral claims are opinions) not an opinion which may be disregarded?

Another example of first world problems. ..

Too much idle time gets people thinking they are transcendent and above the ignorance of their parents....

The truth, sadly is whatever you choose it to be. .. meaning there is no such thing anymore... people just make up facts...

But isn't something like stealing predecated on the concept of personal property (which not all societies have)? Have you seen the God's Must Be Crazy and what happens when the Coke Bottle is introduced? To someone else, perhaps stealing is simply "un-announced borrowing".

One one hand, you could says that for there to be a moral compass, there must be a "true north" to which all compasses point. Although some (myself included sometimes) might say that "absolute" morality is God and his law, to think that a Protestant and a Catholic or even a Baptist and an Episcipalian hold the same morals would be a bit naive. There are dozens and dozen of Protestant denominations/sects, plus Catholics. How many sects of Judaism are there? I know there are at least two major sects of Islam.

"In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." ---Augustine.

Challenge is, I will freely admit, what one person constitutes as essential I may not.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. However, as you stated, a sick, twisted, or warpes person may not feel the same way. Morals are different from person to person, culture to culture, etc.......Again, I absolutely agree with you, just others may not.

Progress. That is called progress. If the preceding generation was the gold standard for all things and nobody questioned it, we'd still be living in caves, and scratching our balls before going out and hunting deer with stone tipped spears.

Can everyone here truthfully say that their parent's generation was the be all end all on moral standards?

No, but I believe they set the bar...and I see a whole generation seemingly content to casually walk under it, rather than raise it...

This is true. Although I have great respect for those who fought for us in WWII, were they not the parents of the Hippies/Boomers? Were the Hippies not the parents of Gen X? and the Gen Xers the parents of the Millenials?

The funny thing is, everybody is viewing the recent past through rose colored glasses as if preceding generations were some moral high water, and not only fail to establish the firm points of what their view of morality is, but also fail to offer definable points on what is the decline.

Most of this thread boils down to the cliche of "things were better in <my/some other> generation and these members of <later generations> need to step up and behave like <my rose colored view of my/some other> generation. "