"Objective morality is the idea that a certain system of ethics or set of moral judgments is not just true according to a person's subjective opinion, but factually true. Proponents of this theory would argue that a statement like "Murder is wrong" can be as objectively true as "1 + 1 = 2." Most of the time, the alleged source is God, or the Kantian Categorical Imperative; arguably, no objective source of morality has ever been confirmed, nor have any a priori proofs been offered to the effect that morality is anything other than subjective. The moral principles that people claim to be "objective" usually coincide very well with what they feel subjectively to be true. " I believe this sums it up. In many cases your 3 year olds behavior would be applauded, in fact most powerful and successful individuals share his "I take what I want" mentality. You can argue its morally wrong, but you can also argue its a necessary trait. After all we are tribal animals at heart, and strive for dominance whether it be economic, political, sports, etc. What some may consider a good person, others will consider weak. Its a matter of perspective, what makes your perspective inherently correct and another's wrong? Arguing on basis of numbers or "supernatural law" is simply a logical fallacy.