it only makes sense to apply morality to behaviour, for you have perfect control over it. it's much more difficult to exert such control over thought, or the emotion that leads to thought. to say that to feel lust or envy is immoral, why it's stupid. of course people do feel guilt over such feelings, but they're stupid (go on, argue with that). everyone has or will at some point feel both lust and envy. of course i'm still quite confused about envy, so maybe not that. the point being that everyone has experienced "immoral" thoughts or feelings, hence, based on that idea, immorality is innate. now for the part I can never adequately express, even my gemini twin didn't understand: if every person is immoral, then immorality, at least in that context, ceases to exist.

can't resist attempting the.. uh, imporrible.

regarding the universal/relative morality debate, i'll faithfully assume you didn't simply side with universal because it's easier! it's also easy to blame behaviour on genetics, but when the conscienceless take the stand to claim, "genes made me do it," that will be just as difficult as "my parents made me." it's parallel to all nature/nurture debates that will continue to be pointlessly argued until our downfall, and i've essays to write. :

mmm, that analogy doesn't quite fit.
punishment to fit the crime as opposed to the criminal may be easier, but it's surely not as fair.