No, my point revolves more around this: that I am not able to even convince myself that my position is anything other than a particular subjective/subjunctive fabrication/contraption rooted existentially in the actual life that I have lived.
Which, pertaining to abortion, for example, I encompass here:
1] I was raised in the belly of the working class beast. My family/community were very conservative. Abortion was deemed a sin.
2] I was drafted into the Army and while on my “tour of duty” in Vietnam I happened upon politically radical folks who reconfigured my thinking about abortion. And God and lots of other things.
3] after I left the Army, I enrolled in college and became further involved in left wing politics. It was all the rage back then. I became a feminist. I married a feminist. I wholeheartedly embraced a woman’s right to choose.
4] then came the calamity with Mary and John. I loved them both but their engagement was foundering on the rocks that was Mary’s choice to abort their unborn baby.
5] back and forth we all went. I supported Mary but I could understand the points that John was making. I could understand the arguments being made on both sides. John was right from his side and Mary was right from hers.
6] I read William Barrett’s Irrational Man and came upon his conjectures regarding “rival goods”.
7] Then, over time, I abandoned an objectivist frame of mind that revolved around Marxism/feminism. Instead, I became more and more embedded in existentialism. And then as more years passed I became an advocate for moral nihilism.
In other words, that “talk” of objective morality is not the same thing as being able to demonstrate that morality does in fact exists objectively/essentially/universally/ideally/naturally etc., “out in the world” of actual conflicting behaviors derived from conflicting value judgments.
My own moral compass is entangled in this:
If I am always of the opinion that 1] my own values are rooted in dasein and 2] that there are no objective values “I” can reach, then every time I make one particular moral/political leap, I am admitting that I might have gone in the other direction…or that I might just as well have gone in the other direction. Then “I” begins to fracture and fragment to the point there is nothing able to actually keep it all together. At least not with respect to choosing sides morally and politically.
Which many here mock. And it may well be entirely unreasonable. I just have not been convinced of that yet. It still seems perfectly reasonable to me when confronted “down on the ground” with actual conflicting goods that precipitate conflicting behaviors.
Though, sure, if, within any particular community a political consensus is embraced such that everyone agrees that behavior X is prescribed and behavior Y is proscribed, that encompasses [for all practical purposes] a fully functional morality.
But [in my view] that is not the same thing as establishing [rationally, logically, philosophically, scientifically etc.] that all rational and virtuous men and women are obligated to think like this.
That seems entirely beyond the reach of mere mortals in a Godless universe.