A Good read

The Fact Is Home Page: "The Intolerance Of Absolute Moral Relativists


The law of non-contradiction holds that two statements which are logically contradictory cannot both be true. For example, either there is a God or there is no God. If there is a God, either He is just or He is not just. Now if God is just, then He would have to reveal the criteria by which He will execute justice, because it certainly wouldn't be just to judge people without informing them ahead of time as to which behaviors will be condemned.
Moral relativists insist that no one can know for sure if there is a God, if He is just, or what his criteria for judgment might be. Therefore, everyone is free to decide for himself what is right and what is wrong.
This may sound tolerant and accepting, but in fact most of those who claim to be tolerant moral relativists are actually absolutists. They neither respect nor tolerate any opinion but their own. They are absolutely certain that anyone who believes that a loving God would not leave us in the dark as to what right and wrong is not only personally deceived, but actively trying to deceive others.
Absolute moral relativists believe that their opinions about what is right and what is wrong are correct and they want their opinions enforced by law. For example, most absolute moral relativists believe:
that women have an inalienable right to abortion
that any law that interferes in anyway with a woman's exercise of that 'right' is evil
that no one who does not accept abortion as a human right should be allowed to be a federal judge
This is, of course, what the entire debate about the appointment of judges by President Bush is really all about.
And there are other 'rights' about which absolute moral relativists are absolutely sure...

Read the article for more