HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Dec. 10, 2004 Morality’s back in fashion, thanks to an exit poll. Give credit to a dull movie season and the fact that the terrorists are still reeling from a punch in their Fallujah. But for those of us who enjoy this kind of thing, this is no time to look the gift horse in the mouth. While the political class scurries to the encyclopedia to look up ‘morality,’ let’s cut to the chase. Americans hold one value above all, and we’re seeing our devotion to it: the value of ‘government by the people.’ Come with me while I argue the point … Morality is about what makes one choice better than others. To illustrate, let’s recall the grandfather of all moral examples, the insane friend with a weapon. Socrates posed the dilemma: suppose you borrowed weapons from a friend. Later, your friend goes insane, and asks you to return his weapons. You have every reason to presume that he will use his weapons to harm someone. Do you hide the weapons and lie, or do you hand over the weapons and tell the truth? Truth is a value, but so is peace, and in this example, you can only have one. You answer according to your own measure of which matters more to you, truth or peace. Which, to you, holds more value? Socrates answered that truth always trumps peace, but most Americans find that extreme. Saving a life through a little white lie seems better than having a dead, trusting friend. Socrates’ example is useful, but most of our choices aren’t cut so clear. If it’s purely life against money, most people could decide for life quickly enough (Jack Benny not withstanding). The tough choices are when we can’t predict the future, and we can’t guarantee that our actions will secure the intended value. If we do X, it may or may not result in Truth. So, we’re gambling on the percentages. Does morality demand that we expend every effort to save the terminally ill, even when there’s little hope of success, and the effort could bankrupt the family? Sure, all things being equal, life trumps money; but all things are rarely equal. Luckily, most everyday moral choices pass beneath our radar. That’s because society has spent a lot of money and time programming us, so that when we do face such choices, the program takes over and we don’t have to think. We call this programming ‘education.’ From the moment we’re old enough to get our hands slapped, our parents and society try to force us into choosing in acceptable ways. Our programming runs deep, and if we’re compliant enough, we’re not even aware that the program’s running. Then, usually when we reach adolescence, we slowly discover this social programming. Some people resent the programming, but most of us appreciate that we needed it. After all, few teenagers are wise, and it would be disaster to allow them to grapple with moral dilemmas without at least some guidance. During adolescence, we review the influence of the programming, and we keep what we deem important and jettison the rest. We usually discover that most of the programming was benevolent anyway. A few bitter souls vow moral revenge, and they decide to live against all social programming, just out of spite. Most of these people wind up in Hollywood or on Broadway, where they find like-minded rebels, and that keeps all of us safe. Once we feel comfortable with the values we’ve chosen, we write our own program and live by it as free adults. Occasionally we have to review our values, usually during national crises or elections. The last election hinged on values, claimed the exit poll. Which values? Many point to the gay marriage debate. Here’s a classic competition between values. The question isn’t about homosexuality. It’s about marriage. Is a marriage strictly between two sexes? Gays argue that their relationships deserve equal treatment. Traditionalists argue that marriage is more than a commitment of love between two people; marriage is also the foundation of family, and in turn, a family demands a mother and a father. To promote gay marriage is to strip marriage of those family functions. Traditionalists don’t want marriage to lose that family dimension. That would have been an interesting debate in itself, but a funny thing happened on the way to the debate. Some government officials took matters into their own hands. Despite laws in place (some passed recently), some mayors handed out marriage licenses to gays. These mayors simply acted on their own. No matter what values are involved in the gay marriage debate, they suddenly took a back seat to another value: the public demands that government officials obey their will. That’s also at the heart of why so many resent the ACLU. The ACLU, especially when it comes to religion lately, wants to take us where we don’t want to go. Consider religion. We certainly have law that protects freedom of religion. For most of us, that means that we should be free to follow whatever religion we like, or none at all, if we so choose. That’s in the Bill of Rights, in the Constitution, and when each state ratified the Constitution, we all agreed to that. However, some of the Founding Fathers, Jefferson for one, believed that there should be a wall of separation between church and state. Most of us agree with that general idea, but only as a general idea. However, the ACLU is pushing the idea that the mere mention of any Christian belief, or display of any Christian symbol, violates that separation. Most of us don’t agree with that at all. It gets even more frustrating when our schools happily teach about Kwanzaa and Hanukkah, but they can’t call the holiday Christmas. It gets ridiculous when a school decides that a teacher can’t discuss the Declaration of Independence because it mentions God. We voted for religious freedom in the Bill of Rights, but we never voted for an absolute ban on all religious display. Let me offer this for you to consider. Beneath all the concern about values, there lies an important lesson in this last election. The American people hold ‘government by the people’ as the highest value. In colonial times, we didn’t like it when kings levied taxes about which we had no say. In the last election, we showed that we didn’t like it when mayors licensed marriages without our approval. We don’t like it when anyone usurps the power of the people. We cherish that value most. ------------ About the author: KC Mulville is a computer programmer, a happy husband and father of four, and holds several degrees in philosophy. Email KC Mulville: kcmulville@hotmail.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
