Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I agree that morality is likely tied to survival. Morality keeps civilizations together and all that good stuff. At the same time, however, morality is a rational ground within itself. So while a population's adherence to a code of morals supports its chances of survival, that code of morals has intentions beyond survival.

The simplest explanation for morality is simply an invention to make life mean something.

op was a wall of text so I didnt read, but I still came in here to say that emotivism is an accurate metaethical paradigm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotivism

so to answer the op: No.

There is an evolutionary argument for morality that allows for rational morality. Like living things moral systems are in competition with each other. Some survive and some fail, many mutate to avoid death. If you follow a moral system today it is almost certainly because that system survived and became popular.

Thus we ought to follow the moral system that best promotes its own survival, because, if you follow a moral system, that is what we have already decided is most moral.

Of course, this is all ridiculous because no one actually wants to follow such a system.