ElizabethTower2, as you said, it’s a similar discussion, but not an identical one. The question there addresses whether an innate sense of morality is independent of that which one is taught, whilst the debate over moral relativity or moral objectivity centres on whether an action that is undoubtedly immoral from one point of view, for example, from the point of view of a terror victim, can be moral from another’s view, e.g. perpetrator of said terror attack. The debate here doesn’t seem to truly recognize what moral relativity as a a concept actually is. I accept that moral relativity may not be the subject here, and the title may be somewhat misleading.
And moral relativity, despite being probably the most common moral standpoint as far as philosophy students are concerned, it being the most adhered to viewpoint in most universities and schools, many consider it a cop-out that allows for double standards.