@hue-man,
One thing that might be considered is the research which shows that certain attributes of the human face and physique are rated as 'highly desirable' in studies. I can't put my finger on the research, but I recall that it has been shown that high degrees of symmetry in the facial structure, and other physical characteristics, are very highly rated when images are shown to large numbers of subjects. Researchers theorise that this is related to 'genetic preferences' for certain morphological types. This has interesting implications, like there is some deeply embedded program driving choice of mates and therefore the development of the species. (But I can't find the research paper that talked about it.)
As regards finding an objective justification for moral principles - I don't think this has ever been easy to do. I recall Bertrand Russell mentioned this dilemma in his conclusion to History of Western Philosophy. Science has provided us with amazing technological abilities, but the way in which they are employed is often more a political or moral issue, and these issues are becoming ever more complex. I think there are 'moral truths' but these cannot be subjected to objective analysis because they require the assent of will - in other words, they have to be accepted a priori before they can really be discussed. In a Christian society, this acceptance was assumed, but in a society based on the values of the individual it is considerably more fragmented. And isn't this one of the underlying issues? Every individual has a supreme right-to-conscience, and no-one's view is better than anyone else's - there are no 'privileged perspectives', I think that is the phrase. So it is a recipe for chaos in some respects.
