Defending Pantheism

[The Grand Nudger]

By demonstrating how a given moral statement reduces to a natural fact, the truth of which is wholly independent of some other fact about the existence of gods.  

Just as the sky is not blue if, and only if, there are also gods...a moral fact is not true if, and only if, there are also gods.  Adding and subtracting gods doesn't alter the truth value of some statement that doesn't refer to their existence.

That depends on what the definition of moral statement were operating on. For you the type of moral statement you consider a natural fact, is merely descriptive, is a mere is, such as x causes harm, where as for most people moral statement are not merely descriptive but prescriptive, contain an ought, that one ought not do harm. The ought in your view isn't reducible to a natural fact, reality doesn't provide us moral guidance or instructions in your view, where it does in mind. In your view the  is just based on some subjective agreement between people, and don't exist beyond them, where as in my view reality possess a transcendent moral law, or something akin to that.

No, lol..it doesn't...and you clearly don't have the faintest idea of what my view is.  

You asked a question, and you got the answer.  Why not just try it yourself?  Think of any objective moral truth that wouldn't be true in the absence of a god. Can you work out, without help, what's wrong with that thought experiment?

Anyhoo...in a pantheistic objective morality, morality would be among the long list of natural facts the same as any other. Part of what they consider god, but not dependent on some god to be true, since that's not how facts work in the first place.