I believe that there is absolute right and wrong. My view is that everything is either true or false: black or white. If anything ever appears to be grey, look closer and there will be small parts of black and white just close together. Like the pixels on your screen that make every color with RGB in different configurations.
I would say that the preponderance of people in this day and age would like to believe in subjective morals, situational ethics, and relative right and wrong as they make it much easier to do exactly what you want, when you want, and feel perfectly justified doing it. However, the flaw in this line of thinking is that there will always be those who do not have a sense of anyone outside themselves and if they want to kill, rape, steal, or commit any other type of victim-based crime, who upon commission of such acts will inevitable be negatively affecting the lives of others who had no choice in their part of the situation. Along with this general mode of thinking comes an attitude about the opposite way of thinking, of which Armand's original posting is a perfect example (I'll explain now). As for the consequences of breaking the law of Right and Wrong, there is no "consequence of divine wrath" as is commonly thought.
For every action there is an (one or more) equal and opposite reaction(s). Each action is the reaction of one or more actions prior thereto. Given this bit of common knowledge, we can logically debunk the theory that there is a jealous being that burns - or doesnt - people according to who did and did not, respectively, break His arbitrary rules. Instead of thinking that humans can do whatever they want, and, when the time comes, be judged for their actions and sorted accordingly (and were it not for this Cosmic Judge, everyone would continue on into happiness and bliss) we must think of pain and suffering, or Divine Wrath if you wish, as the default destination for all (without, for now, giving thought to a more pleasant destination
).
This is where it all ties together, Looking at my example of a victim-based crime above:
How can the action be good (it feels good and I want to) for one person and bad (I'm raped and dead now) for the other person. Being the same action and given the nature and very definition of "right" and "wrong" as opposites and thus the logical inability for something to BE both one thing and that thing's very opposite, I would by logic be forced to conclude that the dichotomy between right and wrong prevents an action from being both, and thus, right/wrong relativity cannot exist.
Epilogue: I know I've sort of changed subjects a bit, or so it would seem, but given the nature of quantum mechanics, all things really ARE related.
If you think I've jumped to any conclusions in my logic please ask and allow me to explain.
oops! Edit time!
Mortis, I think that human knowledge of something does not preclude it from existing. there are many things that exist outside the sphere of collective human knowledge.
FFS! 
So, I'd like you to include some thoughts about that particular deed, based on your views on the aforementioned issues.
) 
Let us assume that a practicing satanist, while always trying to maximize the joys of one's own self, would not feel like taking a faux pas even if one were to give alms to the poor, when the ultimate result of such seemingly illogical behavior is joy for 
