Oops, I wrote this wrong the first time. In any event, my impression - correct me if you think this is incorrect - isn't that someone who would say "all points of view are equally valid" or someone who would oppose this idea but associate it with relativism thinks that the idea that all points of view are equally valid is a consequence of relativism. That is, relativism itself isn't the idea that all points of view are equally valid; rather, the idea that all points of view are equally valid is the result of relativism. Which (at least in regard to the people I'm imagining) still leaves the question what is this relativism that has such a consequence?

Note that ludickid, above, disputes the idea that a consequence of relativism is that all views are equally valid.

Also, I say in my intro that "people wouldn't bring up the issue of 'relativism' if they didn't think they were taking care of something by doing so." So what do you think they (incl. you if you're the sort who brings up the issue) are taking care of by bringing up the issue?