It is an interesting conundrum when people claim they know the difference between good and evil, justice and injustice, righteousness and unrighteousness, morality and immorality, “Truth” and “Falsehood.”

Depending on a person’s worldview, these terms can either be objectively right or true or subjectively right or true. They cannot, however, be both objectively true and subjectively true at the same time. There must be a standard of “Truth.”

There must be a standard of goodness, justice, righteousness and morality. If what is “absolutely” wrong for a society is deemed “absolutely“ right for another society, which society is right? It seems to me, that apart from the firm belief that all truth is not only objective, but is both transcendent and preeminent, then absolute justice is void of all meaning.

Absolute justice presupposes absolute certainty. You take away the precursor of certainty, and justice is rendered completely arbitrary.