"Ethical language is based on fact". Discuss.

Meta-ethics is a study of ethical language and an attempt to understand what we mean when we use words such as "good" and "right". There are two main approaches to meta-ethics: cognitive, which aims to prove ethical statements are knowable as facts and non-cognitive, which argues that words such as "good" do not refer to facts but perform a different, separate function. An example of a cognitive approach that agrees ethical language is based on fact is ethical naturalism. This approach argues there is no difference between "the sky is blue" and "genetic research is good" as evidence can be found to prove and disprove either. Empirical evidence can find the truth or falsity of all statements according to this theory, including ethical ones. When evaluating whether or not ethical naturalism provides a convincing argument as to ethical language being based on fact, one could argue that as Epicurus, Plato, Aristotle and Bentham are all in support of this view, it does add credibility to the theory. However, others would argue that ethical statements cannot be based on fact as people disagree on ethical statements such as "abortion is wrong" whereas people cannot disagree on facts as they are known to be true, such as "the sky is blue".
Those who hold this view may be in support of AJ Ayer's non-cognitive approach - emotivism. He believes that ethical statements are not facts but an emotive response. "Abortion is wrong" is not factual but expresses emotional displeasure. This idea is influenced by Ayer's involvement in the Vienna Circle, who believed statements must be analytic or synthetic to have meaning and as ethical statements are neither, Ayer's emotivism renders them nonfactual. When evaluating emotivism's response to the question of whether ethical language is factual, one could argue it is plausible as most regard emotional, life and death issues which result in an emotional response as opposed to an assertion. To contradict this, people's ethical opinions are usually not merely emotional but also based on religion and culture. To conclude, there are various meta-ethical theories that attempt to prove or disprove ethical language being based on fact but until it is agreed upon what meaning language has in an ethical context, I argue that ethical debate is meaningless.