It seems to me that moral codes are so subjective.
Ironically, those who oftentimes claim to follow objective truths are in reality acknowledging codes which are somewhat reflective of their own respective cultures. Consequently, a given culture’s subjective preferences and prejudices become that society’s comfort zone based upon a process of continuous collective conditioning.
For example, Fundamentalist Christianity is a reflection of the southern American culture, hence southern fundamentalist Christians tend to interpret the Bible through a prism of their cultural perspectives.
Likewise, fundamentalist Islam is a reflection of the cultural perspectives of the people indigenous to the areas of the origin and subsequent influence of the Muslim faith.
Some of the values of Fundamentalist Christians, who reference the Bible as the source of their standards are similar to those values of Muslims who trust their preferred moral code book of choice, that of course being the Koran. Then again, some standards of each respective religion differ. Yet in each case, Fundamentalist Christians and Muslims claim that their respective scriptures are an objective source, which in the minds of each constitutes objective standards for all peoples of all times.
Yet the very act of referencing one’s cultural religious text book in order to establish a moral code manifests the subjective nature of the very process itself. Each favors the book of their own respective culture, hence they make a subjective decision based upon a seemingly number of subjective factors.
The reason that many Christians are Christians is because Christianity is the product of collective conditioning which in turn has developed into a cultural comfort zone. Likewise, the prevailing religion of any other culture is subject to the same process of reasoning and development.
Thus any given culture’s religious stories and standards quite naturally become the faith and moral codes of that respective society. Hence, social standards which are assumed to be objective are in reality merely subjective standards which are derived from any given culture’s historic collective conditioning.
Case in point, the homophobic tendencies of both Fundamentalist Christians and the Muslim communities are based upon the subjective standards which were written by homophobic peoples of the past. Those homophobic writings then have come to be regarded as objective standards for people who even more than two millenniums later still consider such writings as sacred truths.
Hence, a process of collective conditioning gives rise to generational and cultural standards which are actually subjective codes; yet are regarded as objective standards by those who believe that such standards are some form of sacred scriptures.
Similarly, the misogynistic and racist tendencies of the past are established as the standards of contemporary conservative societies based upon the belief that the writings that document such ideologies are sacred scriptures. Thus once again, subjective prejudices of the past are regarded as objective standards today due to the continuing collective conditioning that writings of the past constitute objective moral standards for all peoples of all times.
Indeed, contemporary moral codes which are considered as objective standards for all peoples of all times, are all too oftentimes merely the comfort zone of those who have been collectively conditioned to revive antiquated preferences and prejudices.
At least such is my admittedly subjective perspective on the matter.