It is an invalid argument. For the premises, it is said that " Different cultures have different moral 'codes'" and the conclusion is that there is no objective truth in morality. The truth of moral judgment varies from culture to culture. For the second conclusion, it is righteous to have different moral judgments from different cultures. However, for the first conclusion, it is wrong because even though there are different moral codes, it does not necessarily mean that there is no objective truth in morality. For example, even if killing infants is accessible in some cultures, and for killing infants is prohibited, the reason is that they want a better society which will not be affected by food shortages. it is the scene that both of the cultures are willing to witness. That can be the truth that both groups agrees. Therefore, the argument is invalid because the moral codes and truths are not closely correlated.