morality is objective

Your conscience is proof

Can your conscience be wrong?

I don't think so

Do you think it's possible that two different people have their conscience telling them to act opposite of each other?

no i don't

Okay, do you think everyone's conscience is the exact same or do some people have a conscience that tells them differently?

I think they are the same. People choose to react differently. 

So for people who are okay with abortion, do you think their conscience tells them that it's immoral and that they all choose to ignore it? 

Or are people who are against abortion on moral grounds lying when they say it goes against their conscience?

Yes, that's exactly what I think

Some issues aren't so black and white as abortion, which creates moral dilemmas

Okay, let's move to an even more gray area.

Some people find it immoral to breastfeed in public. Do you think everyone's conscience is on the same page on this issue? And if so, what is everyone's conscience telling them?

I think everyone knows that breasts are for babies,and feeding them. However, breasts are sexualized in some cultures. I think that grown adults can distinguish when it is ok to sexualize breasts(in the bedroom) and when they are serving their original purpose(feeding babies). 

This is a weird one, because you can sexualize practically anything. 

Do you think everyone's conscience is on the same page on this issue?

Yes. As with most issues, it is in the grey area. You can feel guilty about two conflicting things. Our spiritual growth lies in figuring out what is right and wrong in any given situation. I think that alot of issues are trolly problem issues. 

I don't think we can be fully grown spiritually as human beings. I think God is a fully grown spiritual being, and guides us through our conscience(and sometimes directly). 

But if everyone's conscience is on the same page, why is it "a grey area" in determining whether breastfeeding in public is immoral or not? Why wouldn't it just be black and white since everyone has the exact same conscience? 

Because there are two conflicting ideas involved. So there is now the idea that one is more right thatn the other. It is figuring out what is more right or more wrong that comes into play. 

If we know of what's objectively moral or immoral from our conscience then why doesn't it do that for us on this issue?

Like I said, there are two conflicting things involved. Not sure how else to put it. 

You have to determine what is more inportant to consider

I think this is one of the main issues of spiritual growth

But there would not be two conflicting interpretations involved if everyone had the exact same conscience that informed them of what's objectively immoral or not.  So either this issue is decided independent of ones conscience, or not everyone's conscience is the same.

I disagree. I think everyone's conscience is the same on individual issues. 

But most issues are complicated, with conflicting elements. 

If morality is objective, there is only one correct answer. Either breastfeeding in public is immoral or it is not. If everyone's conscience is the same, we should know with certainty whether it is objectively immoral or not.

That isn't true, because like I said, the issue has component parts. It is not a single issue. Consience tells us what is right and wrong on single issues. 

It is comprised of two elements at least,and possibly more. 

I am unsure what it is that you arent getting about that.

Are moral issues with component parts comprised of single moral issues? If so, and if our conscience tells us, in black and white, what's right and wrong on single issues, then why can't we calculate the correct answer? Wouldn't you think at least one person would be able to come up with a "proof" of whether it's objectively immoral or not? 

Can you give some examples of single moral issues and other moral issues you consider to have component parts?

We can take the breastfeeding issue, since ive been thinking about it now. It's probably more complicated than this, but i will break it up into two moral issues for the sake of simplification

It is wrong to not feed a hungry baby.

it is wrong to expose your breasts in a culture where breasts are sexualized and you may cause undue discomfort for others around you.

You then need to come up with a conflict resolution. This is an easy one: cover your breasts while you are breastfeeding. The issue is resolved for most people. 

Unfortunately not all issues are this easily resolved. Most are not. It's one of the main reason people and societies have moral conflicts. 

If it is morally wrong to not feed a hungry baby, is a mother acting immorally each second that the baby cries in hunger? Would they only be acting immorally if they didn't feed the baby before it died of hunger? Or would the mother be acting immorally if she let the baby cry for 5 minutes while she applied her makeup? 

If it is wrong to expose your breasts in a sexualized culture is it not wrong to expose your breasts in a non-sexualized culture? 

If covering your breasts in public while breastfeeding resolved the issue for most people, have the remaining people just not taken the time to single out the component issue? 

There was a reason I simplified the problem. Like i said the issues are probably more complex than i stated.

That could be the case, or the case could be that the the component issues could have nearly the same importance or value, and the resolution is not satisfactory

So it seems your position is that our conscience is proof that morality is objective but it can only vaguely guide us to what's objectively immoral on some issues, leading to conflicting interpretations.

Something like that. 

Are you not confident that one's conscience is proof of objective morality?

Sure I am, for the most part. Why do you say that?