Both. Many aspects of morality as it serves the human good are rather objective - Do not kill, help others, don't wizz on the electric fence, etc - are immutable values and actions that help preserve the human race and further it along intellectually, socially and as a species. Morality does tend to have a territorial side, and that's where it becomes more relative. Different societies have their own concept of what they consider to be moral behavior, often based on those 'golden rule', top-ten sort of objective rules. Problems arise when such behavior is taken on for it's own sake, "Don't question what the King does, because the King says so", "the Bible says so, I believe it, end of discussion," sort of thing. Belief systems clash, and people end up violating the Golden Rules for their own little relativistic thinking. But therein lies the conundrum. Would you use an opportunity to put a bullet through the skull of someone who is about to push a button and kill thousands?