Even Dawkins in one of his videos admits that evolution has taken us down dark pathways, and we should avoid those avenues. But he dismisses that criticism and states it should be done through the liberal mindset, which he "espouses."
Whether evolution is true or not, the ideology it can birth can be dangerous if you let it be the rule for finding your moral compass. Stuu showed in his post how he uses evolution as the basis that reason and a sound mind are his guides for morality. He trusts in his fellow man's reasoning too, assuming most people will agree that issues like murder are wrong. Stuu doesn't live in Nazi Germany, tho, where the norm was that everyone was tolerant of murder. Those people didn't share in Stuu's, your's, or my reasoning, and look at what happened.
That alone should tell us we need a better standard for determining right and wrong than reasoning. People are so bad at it, especially when they are in a culture that tolerates something horrible.
Evolution's best option to gage right and wrong is insufficient. God says do not murder, and his people reason to go against it. Does that mean God's gage is broken? No, it means the people are trying to rely on bad reasoning again.
I hope that all this comes across coherently. It is easy for an atheist who says "religion is bad morality, look at the crusades," to find fault with christians who say "evolution is bad morality, look at humanist germany." But this thread isn't about following the right religion. It is about how God is the only standard for morality.
Religion can involve man's attempt to reason God's standards through his own experiences and knowledge. This can lead to some bad ideas depending on the person's abilities to reason. Even though man messes up on that reasoning, the standards that look to God as an authority are more solid than having a system that can only look to one's own reasoning, and the reasoning of the culture.
We are better off listening to God when he says "do not murder" without interjecting our own thoughts.
