You have given no reason for me to believe morality is “based on what you feel” other than you stating it to begin with.
You are confusing what is true about someone with what is true itself. Evolution isn’t believed by religious fundamentalists but that has no baring on whether evolution is true itself.
So your argument is retributive; that it is justice that a mass killer gets their life taken in return?
This is just repeating the argument I replied to. Moral norms are disputed across time and space, uncontroversial, what doesn’t follow is that morality is subjective. Its a non-sequitur. In the same way I could argue the origin of human life is disputed, therefore all explanations for the origin of human life, including evolution, are subjective, but that is obviously absurd. If your criteria for non-subjectivity is something that is non-disputable then literally everything is subjective apart from tautological statements like “2+2=4” or “blue bananas are blue”.