Merely pointing out a flaw (or arguing Ad hominem against) in someone’s argument does neither you nor the author any good.

If your response was meant to challenge someone on how to define morality, then I believe a Philosophy professor is definitely the wrong person to challenge.

Plus, I believe your issue was addressed in (1).

You are right Chad when you say, “Your readers may not be as smart as you think they are.”

….which I believe is a necessary condition to the pursuit of a virtuous life.

What is needed is for us to find some common ground in our moral arguments, things that we can agree on in order to “get our foot in the door”, to get us talking because that is what we desperately need right now. I believe that that common ground is right in front of us, before our own eyes but we’re all blinded by our egos, or whatever else, to see it. Equality, love, freedom, autonomy,…

There are, in my opinion, objective and universal moral truths that can be arrived at through our arguments.
The solution to an argument is more argument…

That said, every person who chooses a morla position does just that: THEY CHOOSE A MORAL STANCE. It does not choose them. And thusly, their choice affords them no special place or status in society. They need to get over themselves and quit listening to the brainwashing done by their “no-so-holy-than-thou” morality leaders.

So let it be known to everyone, moral or not, that because a person chooses their moral position, and adopts the ways and policies of their chosen belief system, their choice ABSOLUTELY:
(1) does NOT give them a superior moral position over anyone else.
(2) does NOT endow them with a monopoly on good, kind, ethical and high moral behavior,
(3) does NOT transfer to them a position of authority over any other human being.
(4) does NOT allow them to become judge and jury over any other person or group.
(5) does NOT grant them any privileges to spew hateful speech, to incite hateful actions, or to manifest hurtful actions or evil deeds against another.
(6) does NOT authorize them to act with discrimination, picking and choosing whom they believe to be virtuous and faultless, or the opposite.
(7) does NOT pardon them for their discriminatory behavior.
(8) does NOT authorize their so-called “moral” texts to have any superior status over the secular laws of the land.
(9) does NOT allocate to them any preferential status within the United States government or governments of the States or its local communities.
(10) does NOT allow them to act contrary to law, or against another person, without rebuke or reprisal.

Please take this list and apply it to every so they will begin to understand their status with our society. I do not wish to belittle their beliefs, but then again, I require that they do not diminish me or any other “suspect minority” which they may dispute. I demand to be treated with dignity, and they must comply, and according to law or court ruling, as the case may be.

Let it be written; let it be done, NOW.