Moral Law Means a Moral Lawgiver

Atheism cannot even justify the existence of good and evil without smuggling in the moral argument for God.  To put it simply, when you assert that there is such a thing as evil, you must assume there is such a thing as good.  When you say there is such a thing as good, you must assume there is a moral law by which to distinguish between good and evil.  There must be an ontic referent by which to determine what is good and what is evil.  When you assume a moral law, you must posit a moral lawgiver because the questioner assumes the intrinsic worth of humanity in raising the question of evil, an assumption that is not warranted by naturalism.  But this moral lawgiver is precisely who atheists are trying to disprove.  Without that moral lawgiver, humanity is an existent entity without an essential worth other than some self-referencing sleight of hand.

Frank Turek, Stealing From God, p.x