Sunday, November 07, 2004

Purging the PISSED

I've got just a few more thoughts to get off my chest. Hopefully, this will purge the PISSED ... I can't make any promises, but here's to hoping!

So, what is "morality". This concept was key to sending George W Bush into a second term, and obviously, this doesn't sit well with me. So, what is it? Is "morality" an absolute concept? I would argue that every culture has its own unique morality scale. Within radical fundamentalist Islamic cultures, "morality" feeds a very violence base. The "morality" of the terrorists embraces suicide bombings, gruesome beheadings, and strict stigmitaziation of opposing viewpoints. Are American's any different in their "morality"? Historically, no. American "morality" accepted the use of the atomic bomb (twice) on urban Japanese civilians. American "morality" accepted the widespread carpet bombing of German urban populaces during WWII. American "morality" supported the enslavement of racially "inferior" humans during the early decades of American nationalism, and promoted the oppression of women during the first century and a half of American social politics. Interestingly, in the case of American slavery, Biblical morality was used to justify the oppression of black workers, especially in the southern states. All this leaves me wondering, does "morality" actually mean anything significant?

I believe "morality" is relative, as in every human constructs a unique morality scale dependent upon the needs and/or desires of the self. With respect to human cultural identity, these subjective morality scales are fused into a larger, yet equally subjective poltical "morality". Let's examine this further...

Perhaps the biggest "moral" issue facing American voters was not war, or poverty, or the growing gap between the rich and the poor. It was gay marriage. This single issue galvanized the religious electorate in a very powerful way. On a personal note, I would gladly identify with Republican ideals if these ideals were expressed in the traditional "Jeffersonian" style. Saddly, Republicans today look nothing like the Republicans under Thomas Jefferson. Modern Republicans under Bush have created our nations LARGEST Federal government, and promoted an even larger Federal deficit. Modern Republicans have exercised their executive and legislative powers in a manner that sidesteps caution, patience, and the power of the common man for the sake of the
Money Elite and special interest groups.

The issue of Gay Marriage is NOT a Federal issue. This is a religious and State autonomy issue, but this hasn't stopped the NeoCons from backing a Constitutional Amendment prohibitng such action. What makes this worse for me is that the "Moral Elite", by electing George W Bush, has declared Gay Marriage to be an issue of Constitutional relevance. What happened to the Republicans? What happened to State Autonomy? What happened to the separation of Church and State?

(sarcasm)
Thank God the "Moral Elite" have sidestepped Christ's morality of tolerance and grace. Thank God Bush is keeping homosexuals in their place. Thank God the "moral elite" have left defending the "sanctity of marriage" in the hands of us heterosexuals. Now, it is only the "moral elite" who can destroy the institution of marriage.

Here are some other MORAL ISSUES ignored by the "moral elite":

1- The GROWING GAP between the haves and the have nots.
2- the escalating economic deficit which promises to shift the responsibilty of our gluttonous spending to our children and their children.
3- The explicit use of female sexuality to push consumer products, thus degrading female individuals to a life of poor self esteem and psychological sickness.
4- The covert manipulation of Middle Eastern and South American politics to maintain our oil based economy.
5- the increasing use of synthetic drugs in the consumer market, the encouragement of the use of mind altering drugs to school children to help them "focus", and the imprisonment of low economic people for using "illegal" drugs which are in some ways more benign than alcohol or tobacco.

the list goes on, but I've saved the most important for last.

6- those who preach the "sanctity of life" simultaneously promote behavior which seeks to destroy it. We still possess nuclear weapons (certainly more devastating than any drug). We arbitrarily engage in warfare which "incidentally" kills hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians to protect our "way of life".

a final thought:

Is this child worth saving?




How about this one?



Where do we draw the line?

One child may be killed before it breathes the air of life. The other child was killed, through the arbitrary actions of our "morally elite" Republican government, while it BREATHED THE AIR OF LIFE.

Can we really make a moral distinction?

What is the meaning of "morality"?

What does Christ say about "morality"?

3 Comments:

Blogger nobs said...

interesting that godless atheists like Hitler, Stalin & Mao are responsible for the systematic murder of 135,000,000 human beings in only the past 80 years. What a blessing to live in such 'enlightened' times.

nobsblog.blogspot.com

5:53 PM  
Blogger sourmonkey said...

Thanks for posting.

Yes, atheistic genocide and warfare is pretty foul (although I wouldn't put Hitler in with the atheists, he was promoting Christian ideologies while building his Reich).

I would say, though, that religious morality has historically been far more atrocious. Just look at the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the New World invasion for starters.

I wonder how God feels about all of those post-Christ holocausts exercised in the name of Holy expansion.

What we humans do in the name of "goodness" and "God" is truly "evil".

11:53 PM  
Blogger Nique Zool said...

Sours,
interesting post I must say. Your last sentence grabbed me ('What we humans do in the name of "goodness" and "God" is truly "evil". ')
also your societal relativism of morality (it not being transcendental and actually contingent upon the situation).
both highly valid points I feel.
On what Nobs said, I would like to add that those murders were made possible by two catalysts.
1) the technology. the growing bureaucracy of modernity, growth in science - man being able to take control of the Natural World - eg, command it through the use of weapons he forges
2) passion. Adolf, Jo and Mao all believed in what they were doing to be right.nothing in the world that is great is done without passion, yet perhaps nothing evil is done without it too (forgetting Edmund Burke for a moment).
Not really a point to any of what I just said, I just wanted to 'get in there'
Nique

9:29 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home