Treat others how you want to be treatedThis is seen as the golden rule, and it is most of the time.
But it can be a recipe for disaster when sets of morales are different.
I remember a Science-Fiction novel. A military force attacks the Federation and it is soon discovered the prisoners they take are odiously tortured. Then in a second time, it is discovered that these people regularly torture each others and themselves. For them it is a proof of valor, among others motives. In fact, they are applying the golden rule.
This is an extreme and fictional exemple.
In fact, from the point of view of morale, right and wrong are largely socially determined.
Some basic rules are common to most societies, as they are needed for the society to exist. Beyond that …
And yet, for instance the rule which says that one must not kill has known and still knows many exceptions.
One difficulty is that the meaning of the words or the frame in which they are used can change from society to society.
Traditionally, for the religions of the book, homosexuality is a sin. It is defined as sexual relationship between two people of same sex.
For the Romans, the dividing limit was between passive and active role. To be active was acting manly, to be passive was acting in an effeminate way. And that was forbidden to a free Roman citizen. Even if the rule was broken.
For Seneca, passivity is a necessity for the slave, a duty for the freed, and an infamy for the free.
And, up to 14 years old, a boy could be a passive object of sex, as he was not still a man. But the rape of a free man was a crime. Raping a male citizen of a taken city was routine.
Who is right, who is wrong ? Nowadays, according our standards, both are wrong except for prohibiting the rape.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_ancient_Rome#Male%E2%80%93male_sex
Sorry if this link is in french:
https://www.persee.fr/doc/comm_0588-8018_1982_num_35_1_1519
Paul Veyne is one of the top French historian.
https://booksandideas.net/The-Curious-Monsieur-Veyne.html