I think that morality and ethics is an objective science. If morality is “the proper behavior for a person in society,” (moralis) which I consider it so, then that behavior which maintains the society (community, fraternity) between people may be considered moral, and that behavior which destroys the society between people, immoral. Good and well, but complications arise when we consider prevailing norms. For example, thieving is always immoral, but what constitutes theft depends on what constitutes property, which itself depends on the prevailing norms among a group of people. In this sense, morality is objective (theft is immoral), but the determination of the moral standing of actual behaviors is relative (taking “your” car may or may not be immoral). If you want to effectively argue moral right and wrong with people, it would be foolish not to consider this relative sense of morality. And that’s today’s two cents.