I don't really buy into Moral Relativism. Like I said earlier I think that Morals exist in the collective conscious of Humanity, as we grow and learn our "morals" grow and better suit us to live in a society. People, I think, generally need other people. This creates all sorts of problems with interpersonal relationships. Subsequently, people learned how to interact. Then they began to realize, slowly I'm sure, that certain behaviors were unhealthy for their society at large. This realization lead to people attempting to instill values into thier community. These values became so engrained in society that they became a natural part of it, the birth of Morality. A good example of a list of Morals is the seven deadly sins. Religous text though doesn't have a monopoly on moral lists, international law is also a good barometer of Morality (I think it may require some fine tuning personally).
Morality is still in a state of flux though. People are questioning the Morality of the Death penalty. This is an example of Moral Evolution that is happening in contemporary society. This means, to me that morals are not relative, although they differ, sometimes strongly, within different cultures. As the world gets "smaller" this will likely create a sense that there is a Moral Code that "covers" the earth. I don't think that will be a bad thing but I reserve my opinion untill it happens. Anyhow, there will still be differences in cultures "rules" but the underlying Morals that govern the cultures will likely be the same.
There is a strong arguement for moral relativity, personally though I don't think that it is good enough for me to subscribe to.
Does this answer your question sufficently?
Peace