Destruction is subjective, objectively speaking there is just transmutation and change. If you clean your room, is that destructive and therefore evil? Is creating a farmstead (and thereby necessarily destorying the terrain that was before)?
But I can see anti-existence as being evil, but negligible. The only universally moral thing is existence itself, so multiplying existence could be seen as good. The problem here is, that matter/energy is limited, so multiplying existence means reducing size and increasing distinguishment, with increased distinguishment, there is less in common, increasing alienation.
So existence is universally good, but also unchangable and I can't see how you can purely philosophically argue for moral action.
Moral can be derived from god though, god himself being self-referential, literally his will is law and the measuring stick by which things are measured. That is meant when the bible says "god is good" that is not in any material-emotional sense from your perspective, but the necessary logical set-up for a system of morality. (Regardless if you believe in the christian god or the indian or whatever)
The "problem" is that god is accountable to no one, he just needs to make shit up without justifaction, but necessarily there must be at some point an entity doing this.
The painful question is why you are not god? You can also make up shit after all, but it has no efficacy and everything is painful, why does it have to be so painful?
God wills it