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: if one believes the first, then there is no universally correct moral code, only matters of opinion that vary by culture. Cultural relativists assert that “the moral code of our own society has no special status; it’s just one of many” (Rachels and Rachels, 2012). They also believe “it is arrogant of us to judge other cultures” (Rachels and Rachels, 2012) because they are doing what is right in the eyes of their society. William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), sociologist, argued that traditions lead us to the “right” way of doing things. “The “right” way is the way that the ancestors used and that has been passed down. Tradition is its own guarantee. It is not subject to verification by experience. The notion of law is in popular traditions” (Sumner, 1960). Sunmer explains that since morality comes from folk traditions in relation to the culture from which they come, 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 can 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 can he say that a society that advocates free speech is better than the oppressive Chinese society. This would violate the principle that a society's moral code is of no particular importance.