Great marriage advice.

[Crunchy]

No, are you?
Thought or action concerning what? Are we talking about your thoughts on Geography? The action of swimming? No, when discussing morality, we are talking about what is good for people. If you can understand that, then you may understand the rest of the post.

Where the hell did geography come from? 

The explanation was very clear but I'll address it yet again:
This came from your giving no context to morality. You said that morality is "Right or wrong in relation to a human thought or action"

So my reply is that morality is not about ANY thought or action. Like your thoughts on Geography for example would have nothing to do with morality whether you are right or wrong about the capital of Mongolia. It's not a moral question see?
Here is another example. If you are trying to decide between pancakes or eggs for breakfast. Is this a moral dilemma? No, it has nothing to do with morality. Morality is concerning human thought or action in relation to what is perceived as being "good" in an ethical sense, not "good" in terms of what tastes "good". Therefore morality does not apply to ANY thought or action.  

So now, let me know if you understand what I mean when I say that morality is only about being "good" in an ethical sense.  (Immoral would be about being "bad" in an ethical sense)

The reason I'm not addressing your other points is that if you are using a definition of morality inconsistent with it's normal meaning, all other questions are moot.

---

No, are you?
Thought or action concerning what? Are we talking about your thoughts on Geography? The action of swimming? No, when discussing morality, we are talking about what is good for people. If you can understand that, then you may understand the rest of the post.

Of course not is the answer to all those questions. Killing, in itself, may or may not always be wrong. But in either case, the context and circumstances inform the judgement. And that is inherently subjective.

As I said earlier, even a claim of moral objectivity is based on subjective premises. Morality is much more nuanced than you seem to think.

As I replied to Brewer, there are absolutely facts concerning people that are objectively good.
The need for food, clean water and air etc...  are objectively good for us. This means that it is an objective moral fact that it is in our interest to value these things. Nothing subjective at all.

As for nuance, my view is extremely nuanced. When I said that I do not deny that progressing from this moral bedrock is easy but we can build upon this objective core to yield something more comprehensive, that is not an indication that a correct moral judgement is attainable in every situation. There may be many instances where it is difficult to the point of impossibility to determine the correct moral position, and yet this does not invalidate the objective core at the base of morality. This is simply the nature of complex systems.