Snide comments. “Make sure they do the count right.”
A Christian brother tells me I am being oppressive, a broken record, demands that I change the subject, make FB a positive place. It’s hate. He begged to be blocked. Blocked.
Our decades-old friend became personal and accusatory. Unfriended.
Progressives, it seems, all feminists and of the resistance…cannot tolerate a female expressing her views because those thoughts are out of step. “Get over it!” Go along. Let’s put away division and unify. Don’t kill our buzz.
The proud resistance cannot tolerate a woman expressing opinions out of step with the majority. Cannot abide non conformity. They shun someone speaking unpopular thoughts. Ironic, no?
True “Resistors?” They would approve of someone voicing unpopular opinions. They would support the out of step one. They would cheer real resistance.
If we cannot even resolve to protect the lives of the most innocent and vulnerable of human beings who bear God’s image, all our do-gooding is farce.
We do the latter and leave the former undone. This position is morally bankrupt. The protection of innocent life is fundamental to a moral ethic. To be dismissive of the priority of protecting life is to make your whole ethic nonsensical.
To be concerned that some children suffer poverty or disenfranchisement while being less concerned that millions of children are killed is moral derangement. No rights or privileges can be granted if the children are dead.
It is to support a two-tier ethic in which it is immoral to deny a first world living standard to some children but mildly unfortunate to deny life to other children.
These thoughts do not derive from Scripture. An ethic which suggests there are some valuable and others not does not come from God’s Word. One that tells us “Do not speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves” has nothing to say.
When we jettison those old timey manners and morals because all the cool people don’t like them anymore, we have only a passing whiff of ginned-up good feelings to guide our moral behavior. As you see:
I found this fuzzy pink thing in my Instagram feed. Its author was serious.
Literally any random ancient moral code is better than this. This is shallow, reductive, and simplistic. How does one go through even a day living by this code without meeting an insurmountable challenge?
After just seconds one has to ask: What is the good? How do I choose which response is good?
Why should I be good? Why should I do good?
Why should I be good when it doesn’t benefit me? When it hurts me?
What will tell me which action is good? Can I trust my own gut?
What is good, anyway? How do we define “good?”
We are surrounded by voices, pressing in to our thoughts, demanding our allegiance to their rightness. There is no lack of advice. But does any of it have authority? Plenty of the available advice is bad.
Thank God, there is an objective moral guide. How do I know? Our inner conscience testifies to it. Your conscience tells you to choose actions that you don’t like. Your inner voice would have you do the uncomfortable thing, the scary thing, the selfless thing. That selfless thing is according to a code of ethics which is outside of you or me, and in particular outside of our feelings.
There is a Moral Law, and there is a Moral Lawgiver.
Moral decisions are much too complex for such a code as DO GOOD — BE GOOD. Because of that innate regard we have for the objective law, we often know what is good. But more often, there are competing interests to consider. Most moral choices are not presented in a vacuum. How do we choose one over another? We have to compare our options to something objective before we can know what is the good.
This moral code, DO GOOD—BE GOOD, reductive and outrageously simple minded, leads to injustice and inhumanity. Why? Because in dismissal of that objective, transcendent moral law, we throw out anything which tells us what is right and wrong. We have ejected our reason. We are left with our feelings
Our feelings are undependable. They lead us wrong. And the bedrock, the absolute bottom layer of the foundation of our psyches, is how we feel about ourselves.
We love ourselves, we like ourselves, we feel good about ourselves. We can’t stand feeling bad about ourselves. We believe we do good and right things, always. Because we are us and we’re good. We’re not like those other people who are bad. We haz the vituez.
In any given moral situation, I am going to choose the option that puts me in the best light in my own mind. If we can be persuaded to believe that one side of a political issue is angelic, and the other is straight from The Devil Himself, we are sold out. Rioters want me to confirm their moral superiority to police? If I’m not objective, my need to be a morally superior person tells me what to do. No contest.
We are more committed to feeling right than to doing right.
Millions of women believe they are righteous defenders of civil human rights because they march, vote, condemn and hate in the service of the legal right to kill unborn human children. Done. And I am evil if I disagree.
We’ve reached a level of incivility where we consider ourselves civil and virtuous if we only refrain from effing a person off.
As I move away from a recent social media conversation, I reflect on the interchange and find it sadder and sadder. Please understand that I am a person who nearly always feels horrible about my part in a disagreeing conversation. I feel exposed and ashamed.
Not so with this conversation. I am more and more disappointed as I think about the treatment I received. There were no curses and no outright personal attacks. Yet I seem to feel a knife in my back.
Clearly the person I was speaking to thought she was above the nasty fray, and quite quite absolutely correct. Her opinions were the literary and thoughtful thinking person’s thoughts. Undeniable by all reasonable people.
I made my case politely, even pressed a bit, because it’s an important point.
The reply: We will have to agree to disagree.
Meaning: Because nuh-uh. I recognize your reasons and I dismiss them.
I don’t expect to be persuasive. I don’t expect agreement with my argument. But I do expect discussion. Listening. Considering. Respecting. Countering. Back and forth.
What I received: condescension, dismissal, veiled put downs.
At the end, I was thanked for keeping it civil. And I want to ask: is there a reason why you expected me to be uncivil? Aren’t you congratulating me for refraining from acting like one of those _________?
Do you see how the tribes are conceived? She was in the US and I was revealed to be one of THEM.
Once I had been identified, I must be dismissed, but not before I could be put in my place. Notice, I was not expected to recognize that I was being insulted. That recognition was for her and her tribesmen. It is important to maintain the social hierarchy.
I have lived with two people who had dementia. One had Alzheimer’s and the other dementia with zero short-term memory. I know it when I see it.
My mother could present very well to a visitor. She had a vivacious personality and a sharp wit, along with a lotta atty-tood. Her doctor thought she was amazing and lucid. He didn’t stay long enough to have to repeat the conversation twenty times consecutively.
Other times, there were sundowning, agitation, insomnia. The sundowning stopped abiding by the clock when she no longer recognized day from night.
And there were days at a time when she drifted in and out of a half-sleep, no longer differentiating dreams from reality.
To the end, if you engaged her, she remained unusually articulate. Though she could not remember anything but who her kids were.
She was in her mid 90’s when this happened to her.
I’m telling you Joe Biden is much less focused, much less articulate than she was.
And we must acknowledge that the little we are seeing is his best. We are seeing the best, most functional, most lucid parts of his days. To vote for him is to participate in elder abuse.
I’ll make this a nutshell kind of answer to all the millenial hand-wringers who stress about how Christians can supprt the uncooler boogieman in the race. How can I be OK with voting for the uncool tweeter?
If you can assent to voting for a ticket whose platform is legal and unrestricted abortion up until birth, you have a far greater ability to rationalize away evil things than I.
Has anybody noticed we’re not talking about George Floyd anymore? Or even his murderers?
I don’t know about you but as of the end of April, I thought I was carrying all the burden I could. A global pandemic scared the crap out of me and every day I was managing the max amount of stress.
Apparently some people weren’t that worried, because they decided this would be an excellent time for total societal destruction followed by a Marxist revolution. I marvelled at their timing for about 40 seconds.
How I wish George Floyd had followed a pandemic stay-at-home order that day. We all watched the video of a cold blooded murder and we were all appalled. We wanted the murderers brought to justice. We agreed that now would be a good time to examine our society for the vestiges of racism. We planned peaceful protests as encouraged by our founding documents and principles to petition our gov’t for positive change. To remember our principles of justice and equality and to see that we commit afresh to living them.
But we innocent lambs go about our business as though there are no agendas waiting to pounce on our way of life, no -isms opposed to ours, no unprincipled powers who would use our good will to usher in their own power structures. There are.
They usurped our good intentions to drive us to their own destinations.
My friends by the droves sent money to a right sounding slogan. They sent money to a slogan. Unfortunately the money went to an organization which wasnt even a charity.
Let it be said that “Black Lives Matter” spoken by a white person is the most paternalistic and presumptuous expression known. If that isn’t an expression from the perspective of white superiority I don’t know what is.
It really was time to shut up and listen to grievances. Then act to correct what we could so the disenfranchised children don’t have the same grievances years from now. But that legitimate opportunity has been lost, co-opted and drowned out by people who Just. Want. Power. at any cost.
My question is this: how much can the public bear? How much longer before people just turn it all off, fetal-curled on the floor? I’m ready for some relief from man’s inhumanity to man, displayed 24/7 on megaphones outside our windows.
And if by chance we should miss a bit of outrage, one or two of our friends feels the need to have us join them in the pearl-clutch.
We can’t take this level of stress forever. Let us have something positive for just a minute.