Moral absolutes or moral relativism? And why?

Depends on definition.

I would say relativism.

The core of ethics can not be proven.

Under changing circumstances ethics can change.

Moral absolutes are a function of a median level of moral and ethical development. They come from concrete thinking and a lack of analytical examination.

Moral relativism is a function of the highest level of moral and ethical development. It shows the ability to think in abstract terms, a skill that one should theoretically form around the age of 17, but the majority of people do not.

This is the source of conflict between fundamentalists of any group and people who use logic. Logic is a function of the highest level. If you insist that you are certain of the existence or the non-existence of a deity, or in the literal certainty of any religious text, that is an illogical decision and you are demonstrating a median level of moral development.

People who try to use logic to those stuck at the concrete level might as well be using a different language. Their brain hasn't learned to go there yet. You see examples of it constantly here on Y!A. People unable to consider that they might be wrong. People unable to make a sensible argument. People expressing anger at anyone who won't acknowledge that theirs is the one and only "true" position.

It's vitally important that we find a way to raise the level of moral functioning in the world. The median level is what causes people to kill. If you can think in abstract terms, and consider the possibility that anything or everything you've been taught might be mistaken or wrong, you aren't going to strap a bomb to yourself and go into a market to make others see your point.

We need doubt in this world and a lot of it. We need people to understand that certain things cannot be known while we are alive, and it is "rating our conjectures too highly to roast people alive for them.*"

*Michel de Montaigne

I believe in moral absolutes. I know that current thinking wants to believe that everything is relative, but that makes no sense to me. There must be something that is absolutely true. That leads me to believe that there are moral absolutes as well. The fact that nearly all societies have adopted similar moral codes also leads me to that conclusion. I know the answer to that is evolutionary and that those are the rules that protect the structure of society. But it just seems more logical to me that there is a common source for all these moral codes!

Absolutes.

We all know what's right and wrong - it's inherent within us. Even a bank robber doesn't fool himself into thinking what he's doing is right. He does it anyway, but not because he thinks it's right.

Also, relativism makes no sense. Taken to its logical conclusion, we all get to make up our own rules. With relativism, I can decide for myself what's right and wrong. That sounds all progressive and everything until somebody steals your iPod. If the thief says, "No, in my view what I've done is right," you're not going shrug your shoulders and say, "Oh. Okay. Thanks!" Nope. You're going to demand your iPod back - ushering relativism out the window.

If you respond to the iPod scenario by saying that relativism is okay but you can't hurt anyone or take their property, you just created an absolute rule.

Moral relativism makes no sense. It can't possibly be real.

There are moral absolutes, but their application to particular situations is often relative to those situations. For example, theft is morally wrong (that's an absolute), but 'stealing' a gun from a person intent on murder is permissible and may be obligatory.

Extreme moral relativism is rationally incoherent. But many moral absolutists are total dickwads.

So: think for yourself.

Moral relativism. Nothing is absolute (except for mathematics.) Human behavior is an amalgam of emotions, logic, and experience. To expect consistent (never mind absolute) behavior from humans is illogical, so how can you invoke rules and expect them to be followed?

Moral relativism is a self contradiction. It really means doing what we feel like doing and then judging ourselves.

The word "moral" refers to universal law which we all ought (not just should) obey. Such universal law requires a lawgiver and that can only be God.