Logication

That's very simplistic reasoning. It is more accurate to say that "there are no absolutes" is a relative proposition, just like everything else in language, and therefore a relative truth. That mode of thinking uses a much more accurate and up to date philosophy of language and logic than your reasoning.
If you're using arguments like that, I would suggest reading up on the philosophy of language a little bit, otherwise rebuttals won't make a lot of sense to you.

The laws of logic are simplistic. Your going to tell me the law of non-contradiction is not true, or something can't be itself and not itself at the same time, is not true?

No, I am saying the law of non-contradiction does not apply because no one I have met who claims "there are no absolutes" claims that their statement is absolute. They propose it as a relative one. Therefore your saying "this is an absolute statement" is a strawman argument based on a simplistic understanding of their perspective. Maybe you should try and understand them a bit better.

Subjectivity is relativism. If all things were subjective, then nothing is true, except the notion that all things are subjective,which means the statement itself is subjective and not absolute. I'm not saying that some forms of knowledge can't be subjective. I am saying that there ARE logical absolutes. That is the issue. Again, do logical absolutes exist? If you say no, then you're giving me an absolute; namely, that no logical absolutes exist.

Subjectivity is relativism? Erm...no. Subjectivism and relativism are two very different things. Even I know that.

Do you seriously think people who claim there aren't absolute truths haven't thought about what you say? Geez.

Seriously, dude, take Clutch's advice and actually learn something about relativists. Right now you sound like you get all your information from theologians. Trust me, they really aint good at accurately representing othr views.

if the law of non-contradiction is not absolute, then it isn't a law is it? That would also mean that we could go around contradicting ourselves all the time and that would be be fine, right? If there are no logical absolutes, then you have no logical basis for your statements. It would then be purely subjective and meaningless.

I would just like to know what logic you are using to say that there are no logical absolutes? Without them, you cannot prove anything.