clarification, i think there's a misunderstanding
It appears we are both arguing form hypothetical standpoints that seem to miss somewhere critical hahaha
A natural law is not akin to a higher power such as what we're talking about. The pursuit of understanding is great, it is one of our great strengths as a species. What you're criticising is something a human can not possibly understand. There are schools that challenge this belief somewhat. referring to a more abstract god. or even a Spinoza like god as some branches of Buddhism believe, then understanding this would be the key to becoming a buddha, enlightend, nirvana ect.
IF (a big if, hence the caps

) God does exist, then I am, as a matter of fact, subservient to Him. There's no two ways about it, it's practically by definition. I owe my existence to this power, and this power is greater than my own.
By the same logic don't you owe yourself current existence as equally to the Australian government?
Okay, then I'll rephrase. In order to have additions by mutation, then you must have detractions by mutation. IF mutation only worked one way, we would not exist. At least nothing like what we are.
Now were both jumping between biblical shit and non biblical shit haha.
Don't mistake ancient hygiene practices or prejudices confused with a higher power. Those vestigial beliefs are hardly relevant to modern society.
why doesn't Halakha apply? Because it doesn't suit modern life? I think I could find some Jews who disagree. what about things like men not wearing head coverings and women always having to wear head coverings? How would that not be applicable to modern life?
It is egotistical to think you are more than what you are. As above, if the higher power exists, it
is greater than you.
But if you state this you're probably making the assumption that God is just.yes? Just because he might be able to shoot fireballs from his eyelashes doesn't necessarily mean that he(assuming that god is male) isn't just addicted to drama and makes the world all horrible and dramatic to entertain himself. In which case I would (based on my established conjectures of the axioms of morality and goodness) view myself as a moraly better being.
cool beans, more power to you, bro

the op sounded all angsty tbh, and that stuff about death was a bit concerning. i'm glad you're happy and this stuff doesn't really bother you all that much.
I return to it ever now and again and apply new spiritual understandings and philosophies to it. I think we can agree it is definitely a rich topic
but yes I do try and make my titles and OP's at least a little inflammatory or whatever to evoke reactions.