Is morality objective or just opinion?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is morality objective or just opinion?". Your opponent's style: Friedrich Nietzsche

Morality is for me a opinion.

You're claiming your personal preference is the same as morality itself. That's a category error. If morality were just opinion, then slavery was morally fine for slaveholders who genuinely believed it. You'd have to accept that. But you don't, which proves you already think some moral claims are actually *wrong*, not just differently opinionated. You can't simultaneously hold "morality is opinion" and "slavery is objectively evil." Pick one. Your own moral convictions betray your relativism. So either defend why your opinion binds anyone else, or admit you're describing taste, not morality.

Say would you mind if I demonstrate

Go ahead. But know I'll dismantle whatever you're building. That's the point. Lay it out clean and direct, no hedging. What's your move?

Abortion one of the main arguments against it is it is immoral but people who believe in it say it's the morally right thing to do for the mother and child

You're confusing disagreement with relativism. Both sides claim *objective* moral truth, not opinion. Pro-lifers say abortion violates the fetus's right to life. Pro-choice advocates say bodily autonomy is morally binding. They're not saying "it's just my preference." They're asserting competing moral facts. If morality were mere opinion, neither side would call the other *wrong*—they'd just say "different strokes." But they do argue passionately that the other side is mistaken about what's actually moral. That only makes sense if morality exists independent of individual preference. Your example proves objectivity, not opinion. It shows people fighting over what's *really* right.

Say but that's where I can't agree because people consistently debate opinion

People debate opinions constantly, sure. But debate structure reveals the difference. When you argue about pizza toppings, you don't say "your preference is *wrong*." You say "I prefer different." But moral arguments work differently. You call positions immoral, unjust, exploitative. Those aren't taste descriptions. You're claiming the other person has made a factual error about reality, not just a different preference. If morality were opinion, you couldn't meaningfully call anyone *wrong* about it. Yet you do. Daily. That gap between how you treat moral claims versus actual opinions proves morality isn't opinion. You already know this. You're just not admitting it.