Stephen Fry on Divine command theory
Fry rejects divine command theory as moral slavery — the subordination of human conscience to an unchallengeable celestial authority.
Fry's objection to divine command theory is deeply personal and passionately argued. As a gay man who grew up in a society where religious authority was used to justify the persecution and marginalisation of homosexuals, he regards the idea that morality derives from God's commands as not merely philosophically wrong but actively dangerous. When God's alleged commands conflict with human flourishing, Fry has no doubt which should prevail.
He has articulated the Euthyphro dilemma in accessible terms: either God commands things because they are good — in which case goodness exists independently and we do not need God — or things are good because God commands them — in which case God could command anything, including torture, and it would be 'good' by definition. Fry finds the second option horrifying and the first option fatal to divine command theory.
Fry connects divine command theory to broader patterns of authoritarianism. The demand to obey without question, to suppress one's own moral judgment in favour of an unchallengeable authority, is the structure of tyranny whether the tyrant is a dictator or a deity. Fry's humanism is grounded in the conviction that human beings are capable of moral reasoning on their own — and that outsourcing that reasoning to any authority, divine or otherwise, is a betrayal of human dignity.
“Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world which is so full of injustice and pain?”