Moral Relativism

So, the other day I was looking for a speech topic and I came across an article on philosophical questions. One of them was the idea of moral relativism. Moral relativists basically believe that there aren't any absolute rights and wrongs when it comes to moral questions, but rather morality is subjective. So of course, I have to say what I think about this.

The article gave the example that one guy thinks hitting people is morally wrong while another guy thinks it is an appropriate way to assert dominance. Their differences are based on their cultures. The article suggests that they are both right.

I believe that morality is absolute and not relative. Morality is a code of conduct that works best in an ideal society. There aren't any societies on this planet that are truly ideal, in fact I think a perfectly ideal society is incredibly unrealistic, but some societies are more ideal than others. The two guys in the hypothetical situation who expressed their opinions on hitting people had opinions based on the code of conduct in their respective societies. Just because a practice is considered acceptable, doesn't mean it is morally right.

If you are a moral relativist, you could argue that slavery is morally okay. There was a time when it was considered an acceptable practice in our society. The south needed slave labor. Without any absolute morals, there is no basis to say that it is wrong to oppress other people, it just depends on the opinion of the society that a person is from.

In an ideal society, everyone is equal, no one oppresses anyone else, and people behave in a way that doesn't create distance between them and other people. That is because the only thing the soul truly desires is unity and connection with other souls. Since people tend to resent people who hit them, that would create distance between people and therefore hitting others would be morally wrong.

The desire to assert dominance in an evolutionary desire, because in nature animals have to compete for survival. In an ideal society, people overcome their evolutionary desires because the soul is more powerful than the programmed-in instincts. While the instincts might want to distance you from some other people, the soul desires unity with everyone.

Some subjects, like abortion, do have a definite answer but humans don't necessarily have that answer, because we don't really know when personhood begins.

But anyway, that's what I think. Maybe I don't understand the discussion about moral relativism that well.