What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[paulpablo]

Well what if a child has abducted 14 babies and has locked them away in a shed someplace and they're going to starve to death unless you get the information out of him of where the babies are.  If I knew the child had this information I'd be willing to use violence to get the information out of him.
As for slavery, sometimes it's been preferable to take slaves rather than just kill people on the battlefield or leave them to die.

But do you think it's objectively immoral to torture a child just for the hell of it? There are plenty of people out there who get off on that. If a culture was ok with this act, wouldn't you say that they are wrong?

Lol, sure, enslaving is better than neglecting and allowing to die, but wouldn't you say it's still objectively wrong? What about for the many societies who enslaved people by stealing them from their homes and not by "rescuing" them from the battle ground? They most certainly had no problem with that. To them, it was normal and not immoral at all.

Rape also applies.

I can't tell you what is universal or objective because between the two of us we can only agree on what we both think.  So if I think something is wrong and you think something is wrong, we still haven't revealed what is believed to be right or wrong by the other people on earth who have existed all throughout history. 
 As I said previously, I can see circumstances outside of my own experiences in life that would make child torture and slavery the right thing to do.
Definitely in the past it was seen as the right thing to do to put a child through lots of pain and hardship to enable him to cope better with the harsh reality of living, rituals and passages into manhood were quite torturous.
I wouldn't torture or enslave a child or rape anyone but I might do if I was in a different place and time in history.