Even if I grant you that, which I certainly don't, you could still fall back to the position of God ingraining his morals into his creations through natural processes.
Say that this year, a scientist proves that empathy is the result of some particular base pair. They don't find it in sociopaths, explaining why they lack this trait. Some social animals evolve it, explaining altruism in animal communities.
You can still make the moral argument, you just can't make it from scripture, which most people don't anyway. Why not accept the natural world as it really is? There's no reason to resist the findings of observation.
Say that this year, a scientist proves that empathy is the result of some particular base pair. They don't find it in sociopaths, explaining why they lack this trait. Some social animals evolve it, explaining altruism in animal communities.
You can still make the moral argument, you just can't make it from scripture, which most people don't anyway. Why not accept the natural world as it really is? There's no reason to resist the findings of observation.
