As a devout Christian I have always felt that man of my brethrin have confused this concept between is and ought in regards to how they view morality; to me, mans morality has always been a construct of our own desires and social mores, rather than something more simple and pure, like God’s will.

Ultimately this is why libertarianism is completely compatible with Christianity; actions have consequences and the best consequences can be empirically demonstrated to come from
free action; it is the economic theory behind Smith’s moral sentiments – better morals only exist in the mindset of those who are free to construct this sympathetic character in their mind (or not); many Christians, my church being an example, have figured this out and act accordingly; others haven’t – while we are warned not to concern ourselves with others walk with God it does indicate a certain spiritual deadness in those places, probably due to them never understanding what God’ is’ are.

On Gordon, I’d say the manifest obvious- if he has learnt all of Adam Smith’s lessons and yet still chooses otherwise then he manifestly evil; I am sore to use that word but in it’s traditional sense all it means is “brings great calamity to others”. QED.