[Dimensio]

It's indisputable. An agglomoration of molecules has no basis for making moral judgements.

In other words, if evolution is true and we are not "special" creations of God then humans have no authority when making moral pronouncements? Is this your argument?

Arguing against the "social implications" of "Darwinism" (which is long outdated and has been replaced with more effective and better tested theories regarding evolution) is arguming from the consequences. This does not disprove evolution. Evolution is not falsified just because you don't like its percieved social implications.

[Phaedrus]

In other words, if evolution is true and we are not "special" creations of God then humans have no authority when making moral pronouncements? Is this your argument?

No, my argument is that rocks don't make moral judgements. And your either/or alternatives are anything but complete. You may see the world this way. I don't.