Moral relativity
Moral relativity is the idea that there is no absolute right or wrong, and that anyone can freely use his or her own conscience to decide what is moral. For example, a moral relativist might not say that the acts of theft or murder are necessarily wrong, stating instead that it might be up to the murderer or thief to decide whether his behavior is justified; a popular example of moral relativism is the tale of Robin Hood, who stole from the rich and gave to the poor. A moral absolutist might claim that Robin Hood's actions are wrong because he committed the crime of stealing, a moral relativist might argue that Robin Hood's actions are justified because he helps out the needy.
It is often argued that moral relativity is a primarily liberal belief because many conservatives believe that God is the ultimate arbiter of Good and Evil, as per the following quote:
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death. (Proverbs 14:12)
However, there are many instances in which it is argued that both conservative and liberal politicians behave with moral relativism, especially when it comes to loaded issues like that of torture.[1]
The Theory of Relativity has generated a huge following by advocates of moral relativism.[Citation Needed] The idea of moral relativity exist independent of (and substantially predates) the theory of relativity, but some moral relativists irrelevantly invoke the theory in attempts to lend legitimacy to this version of morality.[Citation Needed]
Advocates of moral relativity seized on the theory of relativity to legitimize their views.[Citation Needed] Historians such as Paul Johnson wrote about how the theory of relativity caused a sea change, justified or not, in 20th century thought.