After reading the arguments for and against moral relativism, it seems to me there is no clear-cut answer for morality to be objective or relative. Even if most moral standard values differ from culture to culture, there is still a room for objective morality to consider as right or wrong. I think some moral values are objective and some of them are relative.
Some aspects of morality in human activity is identical across everywhere in the world and it is impractical to judge moral values as completely relative. According to the cultural relativism perspective all cultures are right and equal. If there are conflicting cultures, how could both of them right? If we say no moral principle is universally valid from relativism perspective, then how can tolerance be universally valid? To be a true relativist you have to be tolerant to other cultures because all cultures are equal. So, the view contains some contradiction and Tolerance is objectively good moral value.
Moral objectivism concept in every culture and every individual in the world is not going to be subjected to the same rule and belief of every situation. For example, lying is immoral and it is objectively true in every culture, but in certain circumstances it is rational and ok to tell a lie in cases of saving the life of an innocent person. Even if telling the truth is not always morally correct, moral objectivism doesn’t claim moral values have to apply in every possible situation rather they can be overridden in cases of moral conflict.
The process in which a society comes to their conclusions as to what is morally good or not is different than one looking to observe as to what actions are considered good or bad. As there are good moral values in a given culture, there are also bad actions such as female genital mutilation in some African countries. But the people living in this culture think they have a good reason for their actions. From cultural relativism point, we can’t judge other cultures based on our culture standard as morally right or wrong.
It seems to me that without some objective reference point, we have no way saying that something is right or wrong. I believe there are objective moral values but most of these values are inherent by nature and hard to explain. I also believe in moral relativism because there are factual disagreements on different moral values across different societies. I think moral relativism for the most part is better supported in various ethical issues.