I've spent a lot of time defending arguments for God's existence, especially those of the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition. In fact, Romans 1:19-20 states, "what may be known about God is plain to [humanity], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."
But, what about atheists who sincerely seek God without finding him? I do not suggest that all atheists are liars, but it is possible for a person to unintentionally suppress their knowledge of God. I would point to the universal knowledge of God by appealing to the uniformity of nature, among other things. Plantinga goes so far as to say that atheism is the result of a cognitive disfunction, but I'm not ready to make such a bold assertion.
Instead, I like how Daniel Howard-Snyder sums up one of the theistic responses: "Some critics appeal to implicit belief. The idea is that since God is the Good (or, God's moral goodness is His most salient feature), pursuit of the Good is, in fact, pursuit of God, even if one does not recognize it as such." (Daniel Howard-Snyder, "Hiddenness of God," Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Second Edition, MacMillan, 2006.)
This leads us to the moral argument. Think of it this way:
1. The universe is dynamic. (Premise)
2. The laws of logic and morality are immutable. (Premise)
3. Therefore, the laws of logic and morality transcend the universe. (Premise)
Is this an argument for God's existence? I'll let everyone decide for themselves.