The nature of morality

From here, or here (to bypass paywall). 

What actually drives these conflicts is a more fundamental difference in moral philosophy: moral absolutism, the belief that some actions are right or wrong regardless of context, and moral relativism, the view that moral judgment depends on circumstances, intentions, and cultural meaning.

This is hopelessly confused. Killing others for pleasure, promoting pain, despair, misery, hopelessness etc, are very obviously objectively morally wrong. So the idea that morality is subjective, or culturally dependent is preposterous. It's just one of a huge number of absurdities that naturalists are obliged to subscribe to.

On the other hand, you cannot have fixed moral rules because reality is far too complex. It requires nuance, interpretation in the context of the particular scenario we're dealing with.

If there is an objective morality — and I regard it as insane to imagine there isn't — then I think moral behaviour stems from an absence of malice towards others and a rejection of any focus upon ones own ego or personal gain. It's a universal acceptance and love for all others, indeed all other conscious creatures. Not sure this fits in very well for those in favour of grotesque inequality!