Close. I know there is a moral code, it was set down by God in Scripture. Second, there needs to be this code, because without it all of morality would be based upon man's fault subjective opinions of how things should be. Without the ten commandments, I seriously doubt our legal system would look a thing like it does today. In Darwinism, there is no higher authority than majority rule. Therefore, if you are an American living in America, you recognize the law "do not murder". It is your preference that murder not occur. If you are a tribesman in certain tribes around the world, however, murder is not only okay it causes the entire tribe to come out and celebrate.
This is illustrated in an old missions video called "Peace Child". It is the story of missionaries who went to tribespeople in the SW Pacific that had largely been cut off from others for centuries. They came to their camp facing the greatest dangers to share the gospel with these tribespeople. The tribespeople immediately welcomed them but it was pretty much a ruse because they were actually hoping to kill them. They had done exactly that, some time earlier, when a tribesman from a neighboring tribe had made friends with them. They acted friendly towards this tribesman until they received his full and total trust. Then, they gave a celebration for their friend and in the midst of the celebration came up upon him and brutally murdered him. I think they shrunk his head after that.
Well, these missionaries came upon this tribe and risked their lives to bring them the gospel. They learned the language and began from creation, teaching them week after week about God, His love, and the History of the Old and New Testaments. At the climactic point in time, however, the missionaries were stunned by the reaction of the people to the story. When it got to the point where Judas betrayed Christ, the tribespeople began cheering and celebrating. Judas, embodied the chiefly treasured attribute that the tribespeople loved- treachery. It was only later, when a tribe chieftan gave up his son to the neighboring tribe to raise as their own as a sacrifice of peace (as long as the child would live, the tribes vowed peace) that the missionaries were able to find common ground for the tribesmen to accept the gospel and for lives to be changed.
So, no. I do not believe that there is some inherent law within nature that gives man the impetus to act morally. But there is a law that God has given (which to a certain extent is seen in nature but ignored) that does give a foundation for moral beliefs and actions. Darwinism can't do that. It can only give majority opinion rules that may change not only from society to society but from house to house (and nobody can have authority to say different opinions regarding morality are right and wrong). God is an authority higher than any earthy authority and His law stands as an unmoveable guide to write and wrong that has rational, spiritual, and emotional basis.
So, no. I do not believe that there is some inherent law within nature that gives man the impetus to act morally. But there is a law that God has given (which to a certain extent is seen in nature but ignored) that does give a foundation for moral beliefs and actions. Darwinism can't do that. It can only give majority opinion rules that may change not only from society to society but from house to house (and nobody can have authority to say different opinions regarding morality are right and wrong).Don't you see, though, that Darwinism doesn't try to "give a foundation for moral beliefs and actions"?
Consider electricity: Edison pushed hard for using electricity to kill people. Does that make theories of electricity evil or dangerous? And is Benjamin Franklin culpable for the rise of evil in the world because of his groundbreaking work on this theory?
God is an authority higher than any earthy authority and His law stands as an unmoveable guide to write and wrong that has rational, spiritual, and emotional basis.
There's a name for this: Deus ex Machina. It's when the god in the Greek play drifts down to arbitrarily settle the insoluble conflicts between the main characters. Or any time a play, novel, or movie ends with a solution that comes out of left field. It's a sure sign of a writer who's painted themselves into a corner & doesn't have the courage to go back and rethink (and rewrite) the story so it makes more sense.
OK, that's my negative reaction to your argument. (Which is a very popular creationist argument, believe me.) Now for a more positive vision:
The universe is a benevolent place. By which I mean: All you have to do to thrive in this world is to understand it and act accordingly. And our world is understandable - because there are no contradictions. The Truths by which we must live aren't "self-evident", unfortunately, but we have loads of history & knowledge that we can draw upon to learn what the truth is.
Probably the most fundamental moral truth is: Cooperate honestly with everyone, except those who've proven to be untrustworthy or dishonest in the past. In other words, don't be the one to start defrauding or stealing from others. But you can "steal" your stuff back, or enact some kind of proportionate justice upon someone who harms you.
This kind of principle is the basis for just about every system of law or morality in civilized nations that I can think of. And it's no coincidence: Since humans are the rational animal, we will necessarily each have different goals & values in life. We need a moral framework that is compatible with such individuality. A simple libertarian principle of non-initiation of force or fraud, coupled with the necessity for enacting justice when infringed against, ensures a virtuous cycle of cooperation.
It's no coincidence, either, that the tribe you mentioned that holds ritual murder in high regard is a primitive tribe. There is no way you can build a civilization upon ritual murder of innocents - because no good can come out of harming someone except in retaliation for when they have done real harm to you.
Now, if you asked a member of that tribe if they like their system, they'd probably say "yes". But that's only because that's the only system they know! If you taught them about life under different systems, most of them would realize (after getting over the culture shock) that there are much better ways to live. I think the model of the free, Enlightenment western society is taking over the world because more & more people in diverse cultures are learning what the alternate ways of living are out there.