Right and Wrong, a continuation

Alright, fair enough. Let's talk about the implications of your view.

In recent years, it has become popular for philosophers of different stripes to point to the Holocaust and Hitler as a way of proving or disproving a particular theory about this or that. I think this is because of the horrific singularity of the event. The worst fears of mankind were realized in the Holocaust, and personified in Hitler and his henchmen. Oddly enough, Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza can both point to the Holocaust to prove opposing points. I assume you know the arguments of both, so I won't bother going into them at this point.

But what are the implications of your view if we apply them to the Holocaust?

If some actions or ideas are utterly devoid of any intrinsic "rightness" or "wrongness," wouldn't it follow, then, that genocide is every bit as legitimate as the notion that we should treat people with kindness? Understand, Steve, I'm NOT suggesting you approve of genocide or the Holocaust, nor am I suggesting most atheists believe this. I am simply asking about the implications of what you believe.

Have you ever heard of Corrie Ten Boom? She was a Dutch Christian Holocaust survivor who hid Jews in her home during the Holocaust. Doesn't your view, logically applied, imply that her actions and beliefs were no more "right" than those of Hitler? If they're not, please explain why they aren't.