Are all cultures equally valid morally?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Are all cultures equally valid morally?". Your opponent's style: Christopher Hitchens

All cultures are not valid morally,because if all are ,the austrian painter culture was valid and that means he has the right to kill all j3ws and that would be unnaceptable

You're smuggling in a false equivalence. "Valid" doesn't mean "all practices within it are justified." A culture can have moral worth while harboring catastrophic moral failures. The real question: what makes some cultural practices universally wrong, and who decides?

God decides,and the UN recognises human rights,and if all cultures are valid the International penal court is kind of pointless

You're stacking authorities without justifying either. If God decides morality, why invoke the UN? And if the UN's human rights framework is the standard, then cultures *aren't* equally valid by definition. You've already picked your arbiter. So which is it?

A culture that stones women isn't equally valid as a culture who doesn't,human conciousness tells us that is wrong

Consciousness tells you it's wrong, but that's just your culture's moral intuition speaking. Why should a woman-stoning culture accept *your* intuition over theirs? You haven't answered what makes your conscience's verdict universal and theirs invalid.

Because my intuition isn't arbitrary—it's based on reducing suffering. A woman feels pain when stoned. That's universal, not cultural. Their intuition that stoning is acceptable doesn't change the physical reality of agony. You can't vote away someone's capacity to suffer. That's the universal standard, not preference.

You've smuggled in utilitarianism as universal when it's actually a Western philosophical choice. A culture prioritizing honor, community cohesion, or divine law over individual suffering isn't being irrational, just operating under different foundational values. Why should their framework collapse to yours simply because suffering is real? Suffering exists everywhere. The question is what trumps it.

In every culture they know deep down that causing that much suffering and hurt is wrong but they are brainwashed by Sharia law .Countries with western practices,who recongnise human right develop much better

"Brainwashed" means you've already decided they're wrong before listening. Better development by whose metrics, Western ones? You're measuring success in GDP and individual rights, then claiming victory because they rank poorly on your own scorecard. That's circular reasoning.

You're confusing metrics with reality. When women die in childbirth from preventable causes, or girls can't read because they're denied school, that's not a "Western scorecard"—that's measurable human flourishing. Countries that recognize rights see lower maternal mortality and higher literacy across the board. The suffering is real regardless of what philosophy justifies it.

You're conflating outcomes with validation. Yes, systems denying education produce worse literacy rates. But that proves those *policies* fail at their own stated goals, not that the culture's entire moral framework is invalid. A stoning culture could equally argue Western individualism produces epidemic loneliness and suicide. Better outcomes don't prove moral superiority, just different trade-offs. What makes your trade-off the universal standard?