Science and religion

[Darkstar]

This is proof that you have no idea how to justify objective moral claims. Why should the conscience provide evidence for objective morality?

They're built in morals. Why wouldn't it provide some evidence? Though, as I said, it can't always do this on its own.

Christian ethics is not all based on the divine command theory, which is not really a bad theory considering that God made everything and gave it its nature.

He gave humans a sinful nature. Nice.

There are many different approaches to Christian ethics.

This is news to me.

How does this yield objective morality? You are going back and forth from one to the other. None of this even remotely supports your claim.

You are a faith-based advocate of atheist ethics. Nothing you have saidd, from your perspective from things you can clearly see is on a higher evidential level, it is completly based on unproven assumptions.

Like god? Like god being good?

Actually, from a Christian standpoint it is on a much lower evidential level.

Well, when you have the god card, you always win. But...you haven't justified either of the assumptions I mentioned above.

You can enjoy the peace and freedom that comes with recognizing the origin of the golden rule and empathy in God's intentional design of people

Or evolution. Is this seriously all we disagree on?

, or you can ascribe absolute meaning and authority to one tiny mechanism in the vast biochemical machine of Darwinism, which leaves no reason to prefer the biological features of empathy over, for instance, the drive to eat, as a basic unit of moral organization.

Well, letting someone starve to death would typically be immoral, but the eating in and of itself isn't moral. That is because eating has nothing to do with morals, whereas a natural tendency toward empathy does.