With the responses, it's more obvious that the author doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.
He thinks that justification is about making someone else ok with something. He thinks that there's no way to adjudicate which religion should be believed in. He doesn't have any awareness that evolutionary psychology is a sanitized version of sociobiology (etc.) that was built around the criticisms from the original Science for the People, an anarcho communist organization. He doesn't know that Hayek was in support of a world government. He also writes this completely unaware of the fact that he's judging the worthiness of the morality "implied" in darwinism by the standards of neoliberalism as if it's some generic standard just because it's a "hide the ball" game.
There's more than this, but he's just a goofy goober.