Corrections from an unfocused mind

After writing for some time, I easily loose focus on the concept I am trying to write about, and end up writing some nonsense like the last part of my post about spiritual truths. It was of course my point all along that moral truths in fact can be determined like mathematical truths. That single moral statements can be verified by the resonance it creates in the soul.
Examples of this might be the golden rule of Christ and the Buddha, which must seem to most observers to say something universally true about the nature of morals. But, unlike mathematical truths, ethical truths can not be backed up by physical evidence. Even though the concept 2 + 2 = 4 can not be directly pointed to in the physical world, it can easily be demonstrated with the use of physical objects.
An ethical truth can not be demonstrated in this manner, and this is why I classify ethical truths as subjective, rather than objective truths. The mathematical statement above can be proven to someone else by the use of physical objects such as rocks. In the case of the golden rule, the truth of the statement must be determined individually by each recipient. You can make the statement to another, but you must trust him or her to see its validity his or herself by reflection free of prejudice and preconceptions.
Actually, the expression subjective truth might be a bit of a misnomer, as the truth itself is actually objective or inter-personal. It is the proof that is subjective, not the fact.