Reality, however, cannot be changed, and the fact is that we all act for life and against death. So does every other living thing on this planet. That makes life and death objective, definable standards. 

Actions trump words, they trump ridicule, and they trump academic theories.The absolute standard of life as good is upheld, in actual practice, by every person who takes medicine or by anyone who avoids danger. Oceans of rhetoric can't negate this. We and every other creature on this planet act to stay alive and to flee death.

And so those trying to fight against absolute, objective standards betray themselves every time they take an antibiotic or buy organic produce.

Accordingly, these statements stand:

That which sustains and extends life is good or right.

That which hinders or ends life is bad or wrong.

Why All The Opposition?
Our need to extend and improve life has driven more or less every medical, technological and agricultural improvement of human history. Why, then, would anyone want to exclude it?

The first answer is that they simply don't see it. They've come to see an abstract, constructed reality as the whole playing field of life, and are struggling to find status within it. 

A second answer is the more important one:

Life, if held to and pursued, negates power structures.

Life spawns chosen, decentralized and organic organization. Power structures, on the other hand, require humans (life-bearing beings) to be constrained: they require automatic compliance and couldn't survive any other way.