With this statement, I think you demonstrate that you know that just "law" is what best "promotes peace and order in societies." (Just as "law" promotes whatever peace and order that we observe in the natural world). I totally agree with you!
The point on which we differ, however, seems to be that I do not believe — by reason, logic, or direct experience — that "law" can be, in any way, shape, or form, the result of a "random natural process." Nor is it something interjected into Nature by means of human will. To me, law precedes any natural process whatsoever, including the thinking of the human mind. To such an extent that, if there were no law, there could be no natural process, nor any rational human thinking about the World of Reality into which we are inseparably joined as "parts and participants."
Clearly you see that "peace and order in societies" is a very good thing.
But, can you explain to me how this can be so in your world, which is trying to do everything it can to deny any concept of a ground or criterion of universal Truth? Which, by the way, can only be accounted for by re-introducing God back into the World of His Creation — from which modern science has been trying to evacuate Him over the past several decades?
Do you see my concern at all?
No, it's NOT random and natural. It's trial and error. Judaic law was set down well after humans had been trying to live together for a good long time. Think about the Ten Commandments, and at what point in history they were introduced. After Egypt. After Slavery. Well into human existence. Look, Moses was not an idiot, and I never said he was.
Why is it I keep getting pulled into the theological side of things?
Alright, rhetorical questions aside, I’ll see if I can keep this short:
First of all, if you are using the word “law” to both mean “A set of guidelines for human behavior, often with punishments” and “a physical principle describing how the universe works”, you have committed a fallacy of equivocation.
A human law is something that we codify, we describe, and we judge; these change greatly over time. Such is the reason that slavery (endorsed in the old sentiment) - as I think was mentioned elsewhere - is no longer condoned by our present society. Our laws, like are society, are contently evolving (using the basic definition of “evolution”, not specifically biological evolution); they change and grow. Indeed, if you want to be technical, even religious beliefs change and grow over time, albeit slowly. Where do you think all the sects came from?
Now, “natural law” is quite another matter. Scientific laws describe the way that the universe works on some distinct, physical level, in a manner that has been tested and examined and which we can be sure about. Examples include the law of gravity on the earth’s surface, the law of Mendelian segregation of genes, and the law of averages of a coin flip. These all apply to specific situations - items on the surface of the earth, Mendelian genes, and a balanced coin - and describe what happen in each of the events, which may include probability. These are codified and described by humans, but not created by us, and essentially unaffected by us; the universe works with or without our examination.
The key turning point of your argument then is that such laws cannot exist without god. The problems with this - aside from not having demonstrated the existence of said god - is that it does not solve the question; saying that there is a god is special pleading, and fallacious. At that point, one must consider what god is, how god arose, and so forth. As the comic itself brings up and uses a red herring to avoid answering, if god always existed and was never created, why couldn’t the universe be the same way?
Also, just as a correction, modern science has not been trying to evict god from his creation; god has never been a factor in science, as he remains rather distinctly unfalsifiable and therefore untestable - under most definitions. The others are simply demonstrated false.
Science doesn’t comment upon god, and has never included god, just like it has never included magic or ghosts. There have been times where the most learned men were superstitious, but science has always been removed from superstition - if not the cure for it.
And remember, science changes based upon what’s observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved.