I havent read every comment in this thread so i apologise now if i'm repeating someone.

There is no such thing as "right" or "wrong". the whole idea of that is laced with falsities. Instead it should be thought of as "acceptable" or "not acceptable" behaviour.

2000yrs ago it was throughly right and proper to own slaves and throw christians to the lions. Raping and pillaging was thought to be an honourable act if you were a maruading off the North sea etc, etc. today's views are different.

It is why i find it annoying when modern day "ehtics" are used when looking at historical events.

Anyway, pushing a tentative link for morality and a diety, it is one of the reasons i feel why any religion cannot claim a moral superiority, as clearly moral codes were written for the time.

Back to animal behaviour; in my opinion, i think we cannot attribute a human sense of modern day morality to a non-human behaviour. social animals have evolved forms of communication adequate for their purposes, and a social structure adequate to ensure a good chance of survival, it's dynamic, which is why there's always competition and why you have alpha-males and females constantly changing in groups.

Sense of right and wrong£ I think not, more of an evolutionary trait to help ensure the group survivability and gene pool