John Dwyer argues that there are only two ways to resolve the ambiguities of claiming to do what feels right: either we agree that some actions are inherently worthy or unworthy regardless of our opinions, or we have no coherent arguments against atrocities like Auschwitz. The document also argues that moral relativism would mean we cannot consistently call any actions wrong, could not discuss ethics publicly, and would contradict tolerance by criticizing others' morality. It connects theology and ethics by saying theology reveals life's purpose and ethics guides how to attain it.