If it wasn't for religion

[pocaracas]

In your hypothetical case, the outcome would be a generation of dysfunctional people and, ultimately, extinction. As such, if such a trait were to appear in a population, either that population would disappear quickly, or the trait would be selected against, by having those individuals with that trait made unable to propagate it through jail or capital punishment.

The wrongness you now perceive towards such a behaviour hints that, at some time in the past, in human (or very likely pre-ape) populations it was selected against, as it was deemed that the group would suffer from it... And probably did suffer.

You’re over extending evolution here.

Evolution pertains to the selections of components of our biological makeup. When it comes to morality, at best it describe components of our inner states, our physiological sensations, and feelings. The discomfort you might feel when seeing the holocaust.

When it comes to wrongness,  you’re not describing your inner biological state, but speaking of something out there not in here.

Wrong.
When you speak of wrongness, you speak of an emotion, which is an "inner biological state".

Secondly evolution selected for a variety of components that drove the holocaust. The primary element being the psychological phenomena of scapegoating. The scapegoating of jews arose out of components that were selected for. And scapegoating serves a variety of purposes especially for groups, it’s bring those doing the scapegoating together, motivates them to a common cause, foster group solidarity, provides catharsis. Hitler ability to unify Germany the way he did relied on such evolutionary components of our psychologically.

Ah... Hitler... the holocaust... it happened because the "others" were seen as inferior.
Evolution provided us with tools to deal with our own group, our tribe... others are always some form of enemy.
Nowadays, with out awareness of the whole worldwide population, some of us can extend this inner tribe to somehow encompass this global population. But most people still can't do that. Let it evolve... it will take hundreds of years if not millennia.

Evolution also doesn’t think in ultimate terms, it relies on existing environment pressures for selection,  not non-existing futures ones. It’s short sighted. Hence why features like scapegoating are pretty much a universal, even if it can have long term negative consequences.

Yes, but, for the tribe, they are usually positive.

The "rules" of society, like I hinted at in my previous post, are those that lead to the betterment of individuals in the group.

No, scapegoating might be beneficial for a groups survival, but it would still be immoral.

Immoral to you, with an elevated sense of the group.
But those with short concepts of their own group would think more like: My group survives better if adjacent groups do worse, as they will consume less resources that we can then use.

Secondly our moral intuitions are not seen in relationship to society or a group. Hence why when you’re trying to get your children to recognize something they did is wrong, you can say how would you like it if someone treated you that way, rather than how does it negatively contribute to the betterment of the group. If you try to use the latter approach, they’d probably just shrug their shoulders, and dismiss it.

You’re getting your child to recognize a moral truth, that you ought to treat others and you would like to be treated, the golden rule, that a moral reality imposes on them, not their society, or people.

But this "moral reality" is being imposed by the desire to live in society.
Even if it's not immediately visible (and I can tell that you're not seeing it), it is this desire (which is an actual need or dependency) to live in society that drives us to have moral behaviors.

Sociopaths and psychopaths provide us with a glimpse into behaviors of those who lack such a drive to live in society.... behaviors devoid of morality.