Does radical freedom make a mockery of ethics?

I think that radical freedom does indeed make more of a mockery of ethics than determinism would. Objective and/or evolutionary morals could still fit nicely into determinism. However, radical freedom, if it were reality, would suggest that our morals are completely subjective and malleable depending on the values and whims of society.

If  we can agree on a basic claim like "it is bad to be the agent through which harm is dealt." Once we agree on that we can determine what sort of things would be contained in that statement, and agree that we should work to prevent people from harming others, and since we acknowledge that a person is not responsible for making a choice, we can work to make even prisoners more happy. For an example of how this can work, please see this website on Norwegian Prisons <click here>. Additionally, we can acknowledge that our species does not evolve if we kill each other, and that, therefore, it would be best not to kill other people.