Morality is subjective.

Yes, your clarification is correct. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is always "wrong" to 1) murder just for the sake of pleasure, and 2) rape someone against their will. These are two cases of objective morality where it is always true regardless of religion, society, or time period. The existence of any objective morals, even if it is only one case, shows that objective morality exists and that not all morals are subjective. There has been no record of any society in human history where these examples of moral abominations are not true. (1)My opponent has argued that there have been no recorded events in human history where Murdering for pleasure and raping someone against there will is considered an untrue moral abomination. My opponent has made an argument however, not backed it up with any viable evidence. During the last round I stated that burden of proof is on both debaters. I will also disprove why this statement is untrue. I will be showing cases in which murdering for pleasure and raping someone against their will was not considered wrong. . http://en.wikipedia.org...I'm sure my opponent is familiar with the KKK, they are a group of white supremacists who commited countless terror acts against anyone they deemed unworthy. Homosexuals, African-Americans and Chinese were often targeted reasons as for why are still a heated topic. Klan violence worked to suppress black voting. More than 2,000 persons were killed, wounded and otherwise injured in Louisianawithin a few weeks prior to the Presidential election of November 1868. Although St. Landry Parish had a registered Republican majority of 1,071, after the murders, no Republicans voted in the fall elections. White Democrats cast the full vote of the parish for Grant's opponent. The KKK killed and wounded more than 200 black Republicans, hunting and chasing them through the woods. Thirteen captives were taken from jail and shot; a half-buried pile of 25 bodies was found in the woods. The KKK made people vote Democratic and gave them certificates of the factThe KKK hunted black republicans like animals and shot them. They believed that murdering black republicans was the morally correct thing to do. I have disproved Con's argument that ALL PEOPLE THINK MURDERING IS WRONG. . http://www.dailymail.co.uk...In Tanzina african albinos are being hunted and butchered and raped like animals because there's a common belief that their bodyparts will bring goodfortune and cure illness. It states in the article that these albinos must hide at all times because their own neighbors would butcher them like pigs. The people do not view the act of butchering the children wrong. (2)My opponent has argued that even serial killers/rapists feel that what they have done is wrong First off, let me say that taking the words from a serial killer, hours before execution is the most biased source of evidence you could offer. Ted Bundy's explination of how he feels is clearly a desperate attempt to save his own pathetic life. I would like to refute this by providing a message Ted Bundy himself recorded while he was safe in prison. He had sent this recording to one of his surviving victims. Then I learned that all moral judgments are "value judgments," that all value judgments are subjective, and that none can be proved to be either "right" or "wrong. " I even read somewhere that the Chief Justice of the United States had written that the American Constitution expressed nothing more than collective value judgments. Believe it or not, I figured out for myself - what apparently the Chief Justice couldn't figure out for himself"”that if the rationality of one value judgment was zero, multiplying it by millions would not make it one whit more rational. Nor is there any "reason" to obey the law for anyone, like myself, who has the boldness and daring "” the strength of character "” to throw off its shackles. . .. I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable value judgment" that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these "others"? Other human beings, with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog's life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as "moral" or "good" and others as "immoral" or "bad"? In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my education has led me"”after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and uninhibited self. . http://everything2.com...http://en.wikipedia.org...http://en.wikipedia.org...This essentially proves my point. I have provided evidence to support my statement that morality is simply subjective. As seen in the actions of Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer. Ted Bundy simply stated that he felt intense remorse after killing because he knew that it would appease western society. Same thing with Dahmer his "remorse" should not be taken as viable evidence due to the horrendeous repeat offences. It states in Wikipedia that dahmer started dismembering animals as early as age 4. Also that he was subject to neglect from his parents which causes a poor education in the differences between right and wrong. Perhaps this is why he had concluded himself that it would be alright to rape and kill for his own pleasure. Lastly I'd like to address a point Con made in the previous round. he stated that Aztecs sacrifice but they need a justification. Just as people sacrificed under the pretense that women were witches. This has nothing to do with morality being Subjective or Objective. It proves my point that the aztecs did not view human sacrifice as wrong. They would view it as insulting and morally wrong to the gods if it did not continue.