Is it true that there is no absolute morality?

[The Grand Nudger]

@Benny

I'm going to get in dangerous water with this line, but maybe just for hoots, we can take a little diversion.  I consider our genetic makeup, individually and as a species, a collection of facts-- a record of a gazillion interactions among mates, among prey and predators, between individuals and weather, and so on.  In that sense, any instincts related to a sense of right or wrong, of social justice, and so on, are moral facts-- not in the sense that they determine what ideas represent moral truth, but in that they inform the way we are capable of thinking about right and wrong. 

So they aren't moral facts in the only way that anything -could be- a moral fact...which is why we call them moral opinions, and wonder whether or not any of them correlate to moral facts.  

In a sense, you could say that "morality" is really a word for a collection of social feelings, and that all the ideas about morality are moral facts-- records of the interactions between the social feelings and the specific details of the environment at a given time and geography.

A collection of social feelings would be moral opinions, an idea about morality might..also..be a moral opinion, but there might also be moral facts..which would be included in the term "morality".  

The importance of the subjective perspective in determining moral ideas is pretty overrated if the self is not more than the physical expression of the DNA, and if ideas are not more than that physical expression's interactions with the environment, no?

Not to me.  Regardless of what the self is, or if the self is, we're doing all of this moralizing from a limited, subjective perspective.