Objective Morals and Values DO Exist

Objective Morality: a morality based on "reality" (instead of subjective beliefs, desires, whims, etc), usually claimed to be the province of religion (S1).Cultural Relativism: the principle of regarding the beliefs, values, and practices of a culture from the viewpoint of that culture itself (S2).To summarize, objective morality is the belief that morals were not developed by man, but always existed. Objective Morality typically ties in with religion, as many believe that morals were created by a higher being(s). Objective morality states that you do not learn what is "good" or "bad," but you are "programmed" with that knowledge.However, as philosophynow.org argues, "if morality were objective then every member of our species would share the same moral values. But it is patent that we do not share the same moral values.," (S3). Clearly, humans do not share objective morals. For example, my opponent is against gay marriage. Though I cannot exactly say why, I can assume that it is because he, being a Christian, looks down upon it and its "immoral sexual practices." However, I am an ardent supporter of homosexual marriage. No, I am not some heathenous Devil-loving snake. I simply perceive giving homosexuals the right to marriage morally good because I see it as an act of equality and I don't see it as something damaging to our society. I believe that morals are created and evolved through cultural relativism. I believe that we learn morals, rather than acquire them. We do not have morals "pre-programmed" into our brains, but rather, we base our moral decisions on what we've learned and experienced, and what society deems to be "good" or "bad." This is evident by things in history such as different methods of public executions. In today's society, most of us would find public executions to be barbaric and brutish. A fair amount of people, in fact, have an aversion to the death penalty. However, in the past, public executions and torture were seen as forms of entertainment (S4). The Spanish Inquisition is a prime example of such. King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella and Pope Sixtus IV initiated the Spanish Inquisition in the hopes of purging the Jewish and Muslim populations in Spain. It is believed that approximately 3,000 to 5,000 people were sentenced to death (S5). People convicted of being heretics were usually subjected to death by torture. One infamous torture method in the Inquisition was the Strappado. As the website, HowStuffWorks describes this lurid form of torture, the hands of the accused were tied behind his back and the rope looped over a brace in the ceiling of the chamber or attached to a pulley. Then the subject was raised until he was hanging from his arms. This might cause the shoulders to pull out of their sockets. Sometimes, the torturers added a series of drops, jerking the subject up and down. Weights could be added to the ankles and feet to make the hanging even more painful (S6)." The Spanish Inquisition, a movement which people in the 15th, 16th and 17th century perceived as a noble cause, is now looked down upon by modern-day society. I especially see it as some nefarious excuse for hedonists to torture innocent people for their religion. However, I do not perceive it as being wrongful because I and all other humans were born with this belief that torturing and killing the innocent is wrongful, regardless of their religion, especially since many people during the 15th to 17th century saw it as an act of progress, but because society has grown to recognize that this is immoral. Sources:S1) http://www.strongatheism.net...S2) http://www.chegg.com...S3) https://philosophynow.org...S4) http://www.slate.com...S5) http://strangenotions.com...S6) http://history.howstuffworks.com...