Don't think of me as invoking religion- you could simplify it to invoking some universal constants (like "truth prevails" and "good > evil") and take out the mention of God
I'm not a student of philosophy, but I would think that for the two examples you gave, their meanings are still very contingent on one's world view.
I.e., depending on context, there might not be much use on agreeing about those sentences while still leaving the definitions of "truth", "evil", etc. up to individuals' iterpretation.
For sure. I'm suggesting moral absolutism at a very high level, which some may disagree with. Still, I believe the parent commenter was making some leaps to "wild claims" and "outdated morals" that I never had in mind to bring into discussion.
