In an attempt to solve the moral dilemma, Evolutionists claim that empathy is a source of objective morality because it helps us survive.
Now, we can ignore the fact that coming up with some bogus story about how our subjective moral opinions evolved does not make them any more than subjective opinions. We can also ignore the fact that in order to work, Evolutionists must first assume that survival is a good thing. We can even ignore the fact that, in the grand scheme of things, death and extinction are inevitable, whereas life is never guaranteed. We can simply ask how much empathy does a shark have? Specifically commenting on the sand tiger shark, they're so remorseless that they eat their own siblings while still in the womb. And they're not born with the Hippie peace symbol around their necks either. They don't turn vegan when they first swim out into the open sea. Obviously, empathy doesn't help this predator survive, brutality does.
And this is the kind of thing you see from Evolutionists a lot. "This creature has this feature because Evolution." Ok, what about this creature that survives in the exact opposite way? "Also Evolution." The fact is, Evolution is so malleable that it is compatible with every conceivable reality. And I mean every conceivable reality, because even many biological features that were once said to be capable of falsifying Evolution if they were ever found, such as magnets and wheels, have since been found. But rather than falsifying Evolution, as Haldane said they would, they suddenly became evidence that Evolution is more remarkable than Haldane could have imagined. AlhamdullilEvolution!
It seems obvious at this point that Evolutionists aren't the rational, inquiring minds they claim to be. Rather than using our current understanding of science to draw conclusions about the unobservable past, Evolutionists merely hijack science in order to desperately search for evidence for Evolution. They never question if Evolution happened, only how it supposedly happened. So Evolution evolves so it survives any amount of contrary evidence. In other words, it's not falsifiable. And if it's not falsifiable, guess what else it's not. Science. If it is not falsifiable, it is not a scientific theory. It is a religion.
And ironically, it is not a religion of empathy, even for our fellow man. Charles Darwin, one of Evolution's most famous prophets, said that "...excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed." (1) Do we think Darwin would have any empathy for the sick and the elderly? Or the "savage races" whom he believed the white man would eventually exterminate and replace?
Maybe he would, but a lot of his fellows didn't. As Stephen Jay Gould, widely regarded among Creationists as the most honest Evolutionist in history, once admitted: "Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory. The litany is familiar: cold, dispassionate, objective, modern science shows us that races can be ranked on a scale of superiority. If this offends Christian morality or a sentimental belief in human unity, so be it; science must be free to proclaim unpleasant truths." (2)
And so how can we claim that Evolution provides an objective standard of morality because of empathy? Empathy tends to disappear whenever Evolution becomes mainstream. Even today, we live in a culture of death and brutality. Oh sure, most Evolutionists today are somewhat more civilised than their predecessors, who would quite happily slaughter a tribe of African pygmys and put the only survivor in a zoo as an example of "primitive man", but look at the abortion industry. In the U.S. alone, the equivalent of the entire population of the UK have been exterminated since Roe v. Wade. Empathy? Abortionists argue that we should kill babies pre-diagnosed with down syndrome, and you think that's empathy?
So, bottom line, there is no empathy in Evolution. The irony is human beings can often be as devoid of empathy as the animals. But whereas empathy has no foundation if Evolution is true, the reality is that we were created by a God of empathy. A God so rich in mercy, grace, and, most importantly, love, that He would look down on the human race, whom the Bible says He actually sees as grasshoppers, watch us destroy the earth He once called "very good", and still love us so much that rather than giving us the punishment we all deserve, He would actually send His Son to be born of a virgin, live a perfect life, and die a death He, Himself, established is a symbol of a Godly curse. The death Jesus died was ours. He took the full wrath of God for us.
So now, all it takes for us, who deserve God's wrath, to instead receive eternal life, is faith. We deserve Hell, He died to buy us Heaven. I'd say that's just a little more empathetic than "let's kill down syndrome babies". Not only has Evolution failed to answer the moral dilemma, but has further shown why Christianity does.
References
1. Darwin, Charles - The Descent of Man, 1871
2. Gould, Stephen Jay - Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Belknap-Harvard Press, 1977