James Rachels and Stuart Rachels (2012) introduced the “Cultural Differences Argument” as an argument for cultural relativism. This argument is based on two premises. The first is that different cultures have different moral codes. The second premise follows that if you believe the first, then there is no universally correct moral code, but only matters of opinion that vary depending on culture. Cultural relativists argue that “our society's moral code has no special status; it is but one among many” (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). They also believe that “it is arrogant of us to judge other cultures” (Rachels & Rachels, 2012) because they are doing what is right in the eyes of their society. William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), a sociologist, argued that traditions guide us to the “right” way to do things. “The 'right' path is the one that the ancestors used and which has been passed down. Tradition is its guarantee. It is not subject to verification by experience. The notion of law is in popular customs” (Sumner, 1960). Sunmer explains that since morality derives from folk customs (traditions) relative to the culture they come from, morality is relative to culture. Opponents of cultural relativism argue that if cultural relativism is true, a society loses its ability to intervene in external activities. “We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to ours” (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). For example, the United States could not criticize or intervene against the Chinese government for its policies of political oppression; nor could he claim that a society that embraces free speech is better than China's oppressive society. This would violate the premise that a society's moral code has no particularity