Again, what are you comparing the universe WITH when you want to make it a "better" place? For the comparison to even be coherent you MUST be referring to a standard that is not part of the universe. The evolutionary myth does not logically allow this incoherent comparison.
...For the orbit to even be coherent you MUST be referring to an existing orbit that is not presently part of the universe. The orbital myth does not logically allow this incoherent comparison.
...
In my opinion, too many big words have clogged up your brain. It is not a matter of any great puzzlement that I can imagine, and try to implement, moral precepts predicated on mundane observation of how the world works. As I said, the biggest difference is that I lack a precise math. This does not automatically make something transcendental--it makes it's abstractions vague.
Yet there is nothing in your description of adulterous behavior by men that indicates any approval or disapproval of such behavior,
Indeed. As the point was to illustrate how impotent an arbitrary transcendental morality would be in practice, where it conflicts with sound DNA strategy, not to argue a moral issue.
To repeat myself: people have a natural inherited tendency to be moral arising from obvious sources. It can be harnessed to ends it was not originally evolved for, such as universal human love--in an age of a-bombs (an ambition, I'll point out, that I can arrive at without obvious transcendental necessity), but that won't happen if you think it takes no effort of will and operate on the lotus dream that morals are provided to us by the Good Morals Fairy.
‘love your neighbor as yourself.’ (Matthew 22:39)
"A commission of public enquiry, conducted in a Western country recently, sounded a desperate note for the future of human relations. It warned: "The most pressing problem in this country seems to be for its people to learn to live again in a real community, where people are concerned for one another's welfare."
"Fyodor Dostoyevsky said: "I could never understand how one could love one's neighbor. It's just one's neighbors, to my mind, that one can't love-though one might love those at a distance. The more I love humanity in general, the less I love man in particular."
"The sad truth of human beings is, that they can... love the idea of love---but find themselves incapable of practicing it."
"We easily talk of loving our neighbor, but baulk like Balaam's ass when it comes to doing it. In the last 100 years normal human beings have murdered one hundred million of their fellows. Since the two world wars of last century, we have readied ourselves to a shocking level of preparedness, to violate and exterminate our neighbors on an awful scale. Karl Barth commented, that it only needed the atom and the hydrogen bomb to complete the self disclosure of human nature. In other words, the stark malignancy of human evil-our unwillingness to love-is now writ large."
"Over against the disease of lovelessness, stands the injunction: "Love your neighbor as yourself." We know this law asks more of us than we can give, but we also know that without it, we shall perish. Our only hope, is that God will love us in spite of our weakness, and that he will patiently fashion us after his likeness."