I'm bringing this back because I've been meaning to start a thread on absolute morality and relative morality, and I think that these are synomomous terms for objective and subjective morality.
From what I can tell at
www.m-w.com : ethics is a codified set of morals. While I can understand claiming some distinction between the two, I think much of the previous discussion can justifiably be considered to pertain to either of them. I personally believe that what we commonly mean when we talk about morals and ethics is a derived system of the interplay between individual liberty and social stability. In my understanding, ethics are the roadmap, morals are the destinations - but they mutually imply one another.
As such, it seems to me that there is some objective nature to morality / ethics : in that there will be certain ways to maximize your freedom while respecting your surrounding society, given a particular situation. I should also say that in my belief system, the interplay between these two expressions of reality (individual and society) with other expressions (ie. spirituality, intellectual, biological, etc) are also important, but morals and ethics are most clearly distinguished and observed at the individual/social boundary.
As for absolute good vs. absolute evil - I believe, akin to what I typed previously, these are derivitive terms we extract to mean those things which either maximize our liberty and social stability, or mininimize them - respectively. I think that it goes beyond the objective/subjective split in our interpretations of our perceptions of reality - these are areas of reality beyond the limitations of our perceptions, and yet we derive their existence from these very same perceptions.