Well, I do appreciate your comments and your perspective.
When you say everything is sacred, do you mean that everything is a means towards the fulfillment of a great purpose? This would overlap with something I’ve been writing about, the pantheistic basis of an aesthetic stance which sees everything as “sacred” in the sense of having creative or created merit.
I’d distinguish between truth and truthfulness. The article here is more about the latter, so the question is about character traits. How often are we interested in telling the truth, as opposed to performing some social function that requires that we cover up the facts? Truthfulness or honesty is in some ways an antisocial character trait, especially when the society in question is structurally flawed.
But yes, truthfulness presupposes there’s such a thing as truth. When you say that truth is context-dependent and that in the universal void there’s neither truth nor falsehood, I think you might be mixing up the statements that tell the truth, on the one hand, and the facts on the other. There would be no reports of the truth, without the context of sentient, intelligent creatures. But even if life hadn’t evolved, nature would unfold in one way rather than another, according to scientific theories. Either way, “truth” is a slippery concept, since it has multiple meanings.