> Your response suggests you don't understand my points at all. I understand them pretty well: since moral relativism is absolute, there is no point in setting

> Your response suggests you don't understand my points at all. I understand them pretty well: since moral relativism is absolute, there is no point in setting limits on speech. > ... it's to eliminate the idea that any group should oppress the other based upon what they believe. I have no issues with oppression against those wanting to oppress others. Again, paradox of tolerance.