When worlds collide

Somewhat hinging on Viki's earlier post, here are some questions that i've found are some of the questions Liberals throw at conservatives every so often with regard to when the worlds of morality collide

How can find joy or comfort in Divinity that would create us incompetent, incapable of reaching the standards they set?

What sort of loving Creator would create a system guaranteed for failure?

How can a person have a belief system that assures them they are incapable?

My all-over-the-place thoughts on these questions:
Stadars of morality are the very platform that allow the existence of the notion of 'free will'.

I find the system of free will is the best illustation of a 'loving Divinity' that u can find. The notion of free will and survival within communties (among many other things) suggests the inevitability of suffering. Free will would not exist if it was not anchored by a COMMON set of standards of thought and behaviour that goverened us all. Were it not common, that would eliminate the 'will' from the phrase.

On incompetentence:, I opt to choose the word vulnerable. To be invulnerable, spitirually, mentally or physically, would render us inhuman, im sure u would agree. The argument for suffering again springs up, but it will lea dme to digress.

The belief system of many conservatives assures the dependency (not incapability) on the divine that is the source this common set of standards.

my questions:

What do you suppose is the real purpose of morals - or any standards of thought and behaviour?

Are we capable of setting our own standards/guages of morality?

Does free will allow for this?