the laws written on our heart imply a Lawgiver.
I would agree. Few evols would.
"..in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them." Rom 2:15
While articulated by many, one popular reading of the argument from conscience is in C.S. Lewis book
Mere Christianity. He expounds the argument that universal Laws of right and wrong imply a Lawgiver in the first six chapter of the book. In his book, "The Abolition of Man"[
Abolition of Man Chapter 1,
Abolition of Man Chapter 2,
Abolition of Man Chapter 3 ], he tackles the subject of how education develops ones sense of morality. While doing so he provides various proofs of the doctrine of objective value, the idea that certain attitudes are really true, and others really false... Lewis calls this objective value the
"Tao". The two books go together.
Peter Kreeft has a gift for concise writing while avoiding oversimplification.
Dr. Kreeft's summary of the argument from conscience.
If the purpose in life is to "direct mans future evolution" and man is nothing more then an intellectual animal, there is no difference between helping an elderly lady across the street or running her over because she is unfit. Evolution's source of ethics contradicts the objective value that is written on our hearts. Richard Dawkins source of ethics is contradictory to the observed world.
Dawkin's blind watchmaker idea is bankrupt as well, it is also contradictory to the observed world.
The Bankruptcy of Richard Dawkin's Blind Watchmaker HypothesisThe Religion of the Blind Watchmaker