But if 1) individuals internally sense the same right and wrong, 2) society altogether agrees to same, and 3) laws reinforced the same right and wrong that’s pretty overwhelming. Arguably, the first circumstance is by definition the strongest basis for people to believe what’s right—that is, they innately believe such, so don’t need any outside authority.
That is different from how you try to twist it to be that individuals experience such belief as an arbitrary choice. That is not how most people experience right and wrong—and it is also not how Huxley’s theory explains it.
When has every individual in society ever "agreed to the same"? If morality is merely based on social convention there is no objective reason to accept it or follow it if inconvenient. If it is merely a "feeling" and not objective then there is no reason whatsoever not to just disregard it as a useless appendage. Which is exactly what we see happen in every society that rejects God. Why? Because without God there is no basis for any objective morality. What you are describing always leads to either anarchy or dictatorship as we have seen repeatedly throughout history. Without an acknowledgment of God, man will discard and redefine at will that internal sense of right and wrong for personal pursuits, every time.