[ratww]

A moral statement can be said to be true in a certain societal context, but not in absolute. To understand this truth you have to take into account the body of knowledge and collective experience of a certain society. In this case it's pretty much the entire world. If you ignore it, then yeah, the statement doesn't make sense, but it only doesn't make sense if you choose to ignore the most important part of the discussion and all its participants.

The bigger question here is: why does a moral statement can only be valid when it's valid in absolute? Why does it have to have a proof that's easy enough for a person that's willingly choosing to ignore knowledge?