Who sets the moral standard for what is right and what is wrong? I've heard tons of people saying that they set their own morals and try to live by them accordingly. Yes, most people say that murder is wrong. But what do serial killers and outstanding psychopaths think about murder? They may say it's right, and then you'd have no right to imprison them or anything. Now of course, most places have laws that prohibit murder with threats of imprisonment or death, but what if such laws were not there? Would murder still be wrong, because it wouldn't be unlawful. As far as the physical world is concerned and pushing religion aside for a second, we don't have anyone or anything who can set the standards for right and wrong.
This is all a speculation. I'm not attacking anything you said, I'm just trying to throw a new thought.
Thanks for your insight.
You're right, because murder is merely the unlawful killing of someone, which technically doesn't make it wrong.
Since morals are purely man made as you said, objectively, murder is not wrong, because morals don't apply to the physical laws of the world. Unless it is universally agreed that at least one type of killing is murder, (things such as infanticide have been legal in the past), then murder isn't wrong in that sense of the word. Since there are no universal laws that say murder is wrong, murder is not wrong, but murder is not right either because there are no universal laws saying it is right.
So the real answer to the question is objectively murder is not okay, but it isn't wrong either.
wow i really just rambled there didn't I?