I am delighted to see how many young people are committed to universal justice. But, at the same time, modern society tends to be deeply incoherent. On the one hand our culture demands justice for the oppressed and impartial benevolence toward all. On the other hand it teaches that no one has the right to declare right and wrong to anyone else, as secularism asserts that every person must determine his or her own moral values. This is cognitive dissonance. It demands moral behavior of others and yet insists morality is relative. The idea undermines itself. The promotion of universal justice, human rights, self-sacrifice, a commitment to human dignity and considering the poor can only coherently make sense in a world where morality is objective and whose source is God. Either stop moralizing others or stop pretending to believe morality is relative/subjective. You can't hold to both at the same time and expect people to take you seriously.
If you lie to yourself in this way, you are not helping. It is a type of willful blindness to the real source of the problem. This means if you are fighting for justice with human wisdom alone, with no thought to where human dignity comes from, you are keeping humanity in the very bondage and slavery you claim to be fighting against. We cannot merely judge policies by their "good intentions" but by a consistent commitment to the truth, in a way that corresponds with reality. The real remedy for our problems cannot be based on a lie.
I recognize that many modern academic secularists will claim to believe in objective standards but they will redefine the term "objective". So we're not exactly taking about the same thing. Ask a few questions and their conception of objectivity breaks down fast. They can only make their idea work if everyone agrees and plays the same game. However, we live in the real world, not in a vacuum. - a world which has differences of opinion and not only with only people who agree with us. So if a secularist is morally outraged at some opinion of mine, it is natural to pose the question as to how we know their moral standards are the right ones. Or how they can "demand moral behavior of OTHERS". What standard are they appealing to that is universally binding on both you and me? And who determines it? If they can't point to one, then how can they claim their morality is objective and universal? That is, binding even on those who disagree with them. They can't and that is the whole issue.
In the end, most secularists I encounter still often appeal to an arbitrary standard like consensus, feelings or personal preference. I hear it all the time.