I’m no theologian or philosopher, and I want someone to explain what “relativism” really is, and why it is such a crime. Specifically what I do not understand is how certain issues like contraception can be deemed “against natural law.” Where is this natural law? Where is it specifically written in nature that it’s wrong to use condoms, for instance? It isn’t written anywhere. Issues like artificial birth control didn’t even exist 50+ years ago, and to claim that using condoms is a grave wrong is, I think, someone’s interpretation of “natural law.” I’m no theologian, again, but couldn’t a good theologian reasonably interpret natural law in such a way that condoms may be acceptable?
And what about conscience and “natural law?” What should be the outcome what conscience conflicts with “natural law” (or someone’s interpretation of it)? God gave me a conscience which for me exists as my most reliable moral compass. My conscience has me wanting to help the homeless downtown, and considering adopting a needy child with my wife in the future, and it makes me sympathize strongly with the suffering of those with AIDS in Africa, for instance - to the point that I think that whatever “grave wrong” would be perpetrated by the use of condoms would surely be outweighed by their ability to prevent deadly disease. If that’s “relativist” thinking, then call me a proud relativist.