Alrighty, I've explained my point of view on morals and ethics before, but not recently. Might as well rehash it all here in the Thoughts section.
'Scuse me while I whip this out.
Moral and ethical rules, like all rules made by rational people, have at their core some central directive or directives. The central goal to Christian morality is the glorification of God through obedience to His will. The central goal to Communist morality is the liberation of the proletariat and elimination of the bourgeoisie. The central goal to Buddhist morality is the shedding of karma and escalation into nirvana.
The difference between morals and ethics is that moral goals all require some concrete view of the universe. Ethical goals do not.
Ethical goals are based on the preservation of society. Individuals can get together and all agree on not killing each other, even if they don't agree on the existence of God or the nature of the afterlife.
Now, it's important to note that ethical debate is often murky simply because most people have similar instinctual feelings about right behaviour, and so they feel no need to specify their core rules or goals.
If you're going to have any sort of consistency in your ethical opinions, you've got to clarify what exactly society is, and what it means to preserve it. Is our primary focus the immediate community, the nation, the species, or anything with a pulse? Are maintaining the essential elements of that society more or less important than that society's continued survival?
Now, I was originally going to put a paragraph here about how you need to clarify your goals before you start any sort of ethical debate, but that would be hypocritical of me, as I have absoultely no intention of doing that myself.
Hypocracy is unethical.
I think I've covered the main points. I'm going to bed.