If morality only exists in the presence of observers who can care, then it isn't objective at all - it's still subjective. Ultimately, objective vs subjective means whether or not an observer is required. Thus, it's objectively true that 2 + 2 = 4 as this was true before humans existed & will be true after us. How can something be objectively true w/o an observer? Because God exists; good & evil exist in relationship to Him. North & south don't exist in the absence of a reference point; you are north or south of some point; otherwise, the terms are meaningless. Same with God - good & evil exist in relationship to Him. Once we reject that reality, we're inevitably lurching towards paganism - that is, we don't reject God, we adopt multiple other gods. Thus, the moral relativist hates racism, homophobia, inequality etc.; they're all obsessed with a variety of issues, each functioning as a god or each reflecting some other god's preferences (often themselves & their own desires). Notice how gays will talk about the need to be true to one's self? Well, who's acting like god in that scenario? Clearly, they are - they are dictating what is & is not good. If they want it, it's good; if they don't, it's not. They are the sovereigns defining morality. Ultimately, there are only 2 moral systems: God & gods. Granted, some may not use the terminology of pagans, but their systems are functionally identical. There is no such thing as atheism; rather, there's just different gods. In the US, the most common form of paganism is self-worship, usually in a way that acknowledges that everyone else is also a god. (I want to be gay, you want to be transgender, and she wants to be something else - each equally valid because each is decreed by a different god.) I suppose there are some monotheists out there who think they're god but nobody else is, but that seems rare - this particular religion usually makes everyone their own god.

Thank you for the very interesting conversation!