Actually no, you didn't

I suppose your definition of rights isn't objective, but it covers very little. And the decision to care about rights, or value rights remains subjective.

they are biologically objective but we are humans and we have done it by testing as we aren't God and need to reach objectivism slowly

^

Biologically?

How can I disagree then?

It doesn't seem biolgoically hard wired.

If I as a human don't agree with these that is.

there is a set rights which make any society objectively better and they have been proven

No not objectively better

yes

Better by the metrics *you* care about

you are just subjective

I might not care about those metrics

no

Just because your perspective is different doesn't mean there isn't an objective answer to morality

murder is proven to be detrimental

Detrimental by your metrics, maybe not by mine, or by other possible metrics.

murder is bad and for 2000 years this is proven to be valid

all societies have fallen otherwise

By what metric?

by complete collapse and being conquered

Uh no that hasn't been demonstrated.

I haven't seen a society being successful without there being something against murder

Alternatively, I choose to value abortive freedom over those metrics.

yes it has

10000 years of history

The US by many metrics is one of the most prosperous societies in history.

yep

abortion isn't proven

but I claim it will be

it is detrimantal

Okay well...I guess we'll see 😅

I don't stop you

Is it?

Not by my metrics.

By my metrics abortion is GREAT

and doesn't matter for objective and societal norms

we will see though

Your metrics are not any more objective than mine.

yep