Since I've pretty well said what I have to say, and there's not much point in rehashing--or getting the thread locked--I'm stepping out now. But I would like to leave this thought.
Which is that there are some things we'd better judge, and some things we'd better shun, but because it puts so much responsibility on our heads, we'd better be amazingly careful how we do it. Oh, yes, this is a tight line to walk. There's hardly a tighter one. If moral neutrality is the short way to Hell, moral non-neutrality can get us to the same place.
The appalling truth is that humanity, on its own, will never be able to establish any absolute definition of "good" at all. There is no authority for doing so. Your good and my good and someone else's good strive for control, but that's all we have. Governments cannot define it, philosophers and academics cannot define it: authority is the authority of mutual consent and/or force. There is rule by a majority, or rule by a minority. But the majority is just as capable of tyranny as the minority, and just as capable of evil. A democracy can start up gas chambers as easily as Hitler.
There is no absolute authority for Good without an absolute authority that is higher than human beings. If we ever want a Good, we need a real God who exists independently of ourselves and holds power without us.
I know that God. I have experienced His power in my life. I lived for most of my adult life with a scoliotic curve in my spine that caused more and more pain as I grew older. Then, a car accident that should have killed me straightened my crooked back in an instant. I have a straight back today, and because I also have a relationship with the God who healed me, I know that His Word, the Bible, is true. This tells me He is coming back soon, to put an end to conflicts of right and wrong.
I'm glad that day is not far ahead. But until then, I will speak up. Because I don't want to live in a society where we accept that cruelty, whether fact or fantasy, is not something to be ashamed of.