Of course it is

of course it is wrong objectively

Hell if it weren't for pirates the U.S would have had to rely entirely on the damned Frenchmen to create a navy.

hm

what if

@Benuty I mean torrenting

objectively wrong doesn't mean literally every culture has to have moral standard

and like

there can be exceptions

but that thing would still be objectively wrong

Well torrenting is a whole other issue. At least in the west people don't really give a shit about the starving artist trope anymore.

If artists didn't get obscenely wealthy off their works I might find it wrong.

what do pirates and torrents have to do with this

No one is going to bed hungry over a pirated copy of Le Mis.

Not all cultures prohibit incest

incest would still be wrong and not just because its impractical

I did say legal, and cultural loopholes Niggler. The base concept itself is reviled, and then you have the gray area of first cousins. The Canadians can testify to this.

They have a higher first cousin marriage rate than Alabama.

What is right or wrong from biological stance?

Killing is "wrong" because it's counterproductive to reproducing and continuing the species. Incest could be considered similar because of genetic deformities. But Nothing is objectively wrong to the universe.

so is theft wrong? @President Sanders📍🇺🇸

I get that morality is not rooted in genetics

But what I define as objectively wrong is something that is clearly wrong even if some people disagree

I know its self centered

but in some scenarios

only the vile will disagree that something is objecitvely wrong

@Deleted User not objectively. But to judge it would really depend on context.
Stealing from a poor beggar? Pretty wrong.
Stealing from a rich billionaire that wouldn't even notice and it wouldn't affect his health or life negatively? Not really.

stealing from the rich isn't as bad as stealing from a poor man, but it is still wrong

because its theft

Is murdering an entire orphanage objectively wrong?

and then defiling their corpses?

and then burning the building down

There is no context that could justify that

At the end of the day humanity has had a primal source for morality since its days fighting other animals in the plains. We had rites of purgation to exile perceived threats to our communities, common things to bring us together (such as rituals), and of course the worry of incest (which is why we used to mate with other humanoids if we were out of options). I mean its not objective morality, but still.

Its simply too excessive

Don't give me the **Oh but a divine entity said he would blow up the earth if you didn't**

@21ooAB The only context to justify this would be a faction committing utterly atrocious war crimes for the hell of it.

@Benuty But its still objectively wrong

The thing is, you can justify anything

@21ooAB I never said it wasn't, but people will justify anything especially if it produces results.

But that does't ever make it right

even if some psychopaths disagree