And speaking of presuppositional apologetics, check out this article from Answers in Genesis: “Morality – the Secular Response?“
On that note and in light of recent events, I have to say a few words of my own:
It’s true that for morality, you have to have God to set the standards and be the highest court of appeals. Not just in the deistic sense of a creator god who distances himself from what he has made, either, but the imminent Christian God who reveals His will to man in His Word. Otherwise, without a revealed standard, it’s every man for himself.
In that paradigm, your morality may be different than my morality, but there is no higher authority to appeal to that can decide between us. We are at an impasse. To that end, then, we don’t even have morality – only preferences. That is why secular humanism is and must be reduced to “survival of the fittest”; the Golden rule becomes just what the disguised Jafar told Aladdin in the Disney movie bearing that name, “The one with the gold makes the rules.” That is, the one with the power to enforce his/her preferences upon the masses defines “morality”.
And is this not what we see today? The “morality” of our nation is changing as those in power silence the dialogue and move towards totalitarian control of our speech, even our thoughts. Just look at the the recent Chik-fil-A debacle for proof of how secularism cannot tolerate respectful dissent from the program. The preference of those in power (President – with the power to lead; mass media – with the power to speak; special interest groups – with the power to influence through money and, sometimes, fear; etc.) is the new “right”, and those who oppose it are said to be “on the wrong side of history”, “bigoted”, “hate-mongers”, and the like.
But those secular humanists invoking morality – including morally charged words like “good” or “bad” – do so falsely, and we must recognize that or be overwhelmed by the cacophony.