First of all, there is NO such thing as 'objective morality'. Nor can there be.
150 years ago, in the US, 'objective morality', fully supported by religion, said that Black people were subhuman, and that is why it was OK to keep them as SLAVES. No one sane believes any such nonsense anymore. So, is our morality now 'objective', or the morality 150 years ago ? It can't be both, because in between that span of time, it CHANGED.
According to the bible, which one of the following is immoral?
a) Raping someone
b) Treating women as objects
c) Picking up sticks on a Saturday
f) Killing someone for having different views to you
According to the Bible, only option c) is wrong. All of the others are either accepted as mainstream, or even encouraged, in the Bible.
However, you and I both know that all of the others are wrong and that c) is perfectly innocent. You do not get your morality from scripture and neither does anyone else.
Searching through religious scripture for morality is like searching through the sewers for small coins; sure, there is some in there, but is it really worth it?
-If one argues, as some deeply religious individuals do, that without God there can be no ultimate right and wrong - namely that God determines for us what is right and wrong - one can then ask the question: What is God decreed that rape and murder were morally acceptable ? Would that make them so ?
While some might answer yes, I think most believers would say no, God would not make such a decree. But why not ? Presumably because God would have some *reason* for not making such a decree. Again, presumably this is because *reason* suggests that rape and murder are not morally acceptable. But if God would have to appeal to *reason*, then why not eliminate the middleman entirely ?- Lawrence Krauss, A Universe From Nothing, Pgs 171-172.