Aah, but in all that you wrote here you didn't use the word 'better', which was what i was talking about.
Better is an opinion and is not based on hard data.
Better is always from some(ones) point of view.
And i agree with most of the rest of your post, hard facts are hard facts.
So hards fact are telling us
it is better to take care on our offspring then to abuse it.
That is only true becuase we have this impulse built in because it makes a lot of sense evolutionary speaking.
Then again, people have been abusing other people for ever and it seems we are still here.
So while it is better from the abused persons point of view, it does not make it better overall.
And it's only people that care about such things.
Ask a rabbit and he would propably be neutral on the issue.
Actually, all moral values and such are limited to the human species.
They are also telling us it is better to have energy then dont have it.
People have had energy for ever.
It is called the sun and it is captured in plants and then animals. Then, after milions of years sunlight is turned to oil and gass.
Our current need for energy comes largely from how we organized our societies.
But is it better?
For the short term it is certainly a view that most people have.
But how about the environment, for instance?
Will your children still think it was 'better' to use up so much fossil fuels?
And since most of our energy comes from fossil fuels, is using more of it better or not?
How about the fact that in 100 years we have used up most of the energy that has been stored in the earth for milions of years.
In 50 years we will have used up the rest.
Is it better to use up everything or is it better to leave some for future generations?
I would say that thinking it is better is very egoistical and certainly very short term.
So, now we have learned that the human moral evaluation changes even with the time-span that you look at.
There are no absolute values.
It all depends on how you look at it and then how you judge (form opinion, whatever).