Moral relativism is a slippery worldview. It is blatantly self-defeating yet alarmingly popular because it sounds so tolerant and inclusive. Relativists want to liberate the world of moral absolutes they believe inhibit personal freedom and expression, yet they advance their own subjective views as absolute standards.
It takes practice to recognize the convoluted language relativists use. They preach against absolutes and judgments but they must use absolutes and judgments to determine that not using them is better. Therefore, the best defense against relativistic language is to turn it on itself. Once the language is exposed, the ideas evaporate and unless absolute truth is recognized, emotionalism will carry their argument. This means we must learn to respond with clarity and grace, not our own emotionalism.
Finally, relativists fail to see that relativism is enslaving, not liberating. If everyone decides for themselves what is right or wrong, standards will eventually conflict and chaos will ensue. If all standards are presumably equal, who then decides what is right? The only alternative is that those with the most power will decide. A relativistic world is ultimately governed by one absolute principle–might determines right. This means relativism leads to a society that is the opposite of the liberated world relativists imagine.