Monday, October 27, 2008

Whose Morality Do We Choose

Another serious post.

In response to my last post, Buck commented: I do not believe gub'mint has any business legislating morality, and "morality" seems to be a large part of the religious right's agenda... i.e., repealing Roe v. Wade and the whole gay marriage flap... just to name two very prominent issues.

In response to Buck, I commented: Buck, I agree to a certain extent. I certainly don’t think the government needs to make "morality laws." I think the government’s main reason for being is to protect its citizens. But I am going to argue that Roe v Wade is not a morality law. Most all of us would agree that taking a life is a crime. So why doesn’t our government protect unborn children?

Please understand that Buck sides with Conservatives and read all of his comments. I had more on the subject and decided to post it rather than leave it on the comments. Once again, beware the serious thoughts!

I know that the government does not need to be in the business of making laws that govern our morality, yet they do just that every day. It is the questions of where we draw the line and whose morality we go with – mine or yours? I’m not sure where I stand with the whole "gay marriage flap." Personally, as an EC (Evangelical Christian), I don’t like the whole Gay thing, but I’m not sure the government should say who should get married and who should not. While I don’t really care to think about two men together or two women, maybe gay marriage is not such a big thing. Of course, I don’t understand how someone who already breaks such a law of God would care one way or the other about marriage, which is actually a Bible based law. So, should we also drop all of the laws governing marriage? Maybe the government should not decide how old we have to be to get married. How about laws of on bigamy - why can’t someone be married to several people if they are all consenting? Speaking of consent, why don’t we drop the laws governing sexual consent? Why should the government decide that for us? Is incest a moral question - we have laws governing that - should we drop those? Is this the kind of morality laws we should do away with? We should probably do away with drinking laws and drug laws as they pertain to morality too. I’m sure there are lots of laws governing morality that we could do away with. I find it quite ironic that the Liberals who want to okay Gay marriage and such were horrified that at the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints and their views of marriage. Although I may not be in either of those camps, it is the perfect example of whose morality do we go with when passing laws.

Isn’t it funny that Liberals are the one who pass some of these morality laws and not just the Conservatives? Like corporal punishment laws – it is usually the more liberal folk who do not want parents or teachers spanking children. Well, spanking is just about gone from public schools (along with any and all discipline) but now and then the Liberals try to pass laws against parents spanking their own children in their own homes. I guess it is okay if you kill your unborn child, just don’t spank him when he is a growing up. I did agree with Lori’s comment on Buck’s blog that a woman should have the right to do with her own body as she wishes. Maybe she should be able to have sex with whomever she wants, whenever she wants at whatever age. She can use and abuse her body as she pleases, I guess. Maybe she should be able to marry whomever and whenever. But when she is carrying a life, a baby, then it is no longer just her body – it is a human, and she should be held responsible. Whether you are Liberal or Conservative, most of us agree that killing someone is wrong. In fact, most Liberals don’t even like capital punishment finding it a form of murder. Yet, they will let a woman kill her baby as long as it is not totally out of the womb. It has always been odd to me that a person who kills a pregnant woman and therefore kills her unborn baby can be held responsible for two deaths. But if the pregnant woman herself has the baby killed, that is okay. Women have been held responsible for killing their newly born babies (usually by abandonment). But if they had just had their babies killed a month or so earlier by a doctor, it would have been fine. That kind of morality law is a strange thing to me, and it sends an odd message. It makes our government seem wishy-washy.

You are probably thinking that yes, we agree that murder is wrong, but the morality part and the part we disagree on is when does life begin. Let me tell it like it is. Conservative or Liberal - for a pregnant woman who wants her baby, life begins the minute she finds out she is going to have a baby. For a pregnant woman who does not want a baby, what is growing inside her is just cells. For those of us who think an unborn child is a human life, we don’t think there is a question of morality. We think murder is wrong. People who support abortion, are people who bury their head in the sand.

Yikes. I pushed "Publish" again~!


Dawn said...

Back on line again today and the first blog I read was yours Lou, Totally and amazingly well said!
I'm in awe of your words here. You go girl, I'm with ya!!

Jenn said...

I soooo agree with you ! When you hear people yapping about womens rights and they should be able to choose what they do to their own bodies , yes they should be able to do that , meaning if they want to have 50 tats or get lots of piercings or chop off their own leg I say go right ahead it's your body!

However being allowed to kill a baby at any stage in your pregnancy is WRONG , it is not your body it is another person and although that person maybe small it is still a person!

I have a big problem with it and I'd say it to anyone. If it is wrong to go to the hospital and kill someone's newborn and you would go to jail over it, then why should it be ok to tell a doctor to kill the baby in your belly the baby in some cases that you have seen yourself in ultra sounds and felt moving and kicking inside you, the baby that could live if born.

I think if you don't want that baby give it up to a family that wants one badly and can't have their own.

For a certain someone to vote for late term abortions and partial birth abortion and it gets even better he also thinks it's ok to , if the baby manages to live through it ...said baby is to be left alone to die and there is no medical help given to it.

Someone that places their newborn in the garbage to be left alone to die gets in trouble...isn't it the same thing?

Why not give that baby to a family ? Instead of letting it lay there crying alone until it's dead.

However the same person has said he thinks we should help other countries that are going through bad times, yes it is horrible the things that go on in those places, however why waste the money and lives to help them ,but then the same person says it's ok for doctors to to hack up new babies here in their own country.

For the first time ever I wish I could vote, and this is comming a few months to early or I would be and it wouldn't be for that !

Buck said...

All very good points in this post, Lou, not many of which are debatable from a traditional Christian (moral) POV. But... that said, these things may indeed be debatable if you were raised under another value system, or spent a great deal of time in another country where the laws and/or values differ considerably from our own.

An example I believe I gave quite some time ago when this subject came up is Japan. Abortion was the primary means of birth control when I lived there in the late '60s and again in the mid-70s, and birth control pills were illegal. THAT offended my sensibilities and I never did understand the rationale for the "way things were." But... as I said: different culture, different values. I have GREAT difficulty getting my mind wrapped around this subject effectively, and especially when it comes to appreciating/understanding the other side's (in this case: the American Left's) POV. I understand the way I feel, but I'm VERY reluctant to say others should feel the same way... no matter what the issue may be.

BTW... have you seen this?

Bag Blog said...

Jenn, we are on the same page.

Mezzo SF said...

Hitting the nail on the head: Conservative or Liberal - for a pregnant woman who wants her baby, life begins the minute she finds out she is going to have a baby. For a pregnant woman who does not want a baby, what is growing inside her is just cells.

GUYK said...

maybe that there is just one moral absolute..theft is wrong.

All others can be connected in some way..murder? theft of life.

Many if not most of our so called moral laws actually come about because of economics..marriage? A religious concept but used by governments to decide property law.

Age of consent? Arbitrary and for the most part go against the laws of nature but established mostly for the same reason that child labor laws were protect wages of fact so much of the 'age' laws are not told me at 18 I could be sent to a combat zone and dodge bullets but when I came back you told me I was not old enough to enjoy a cold beer..go figure..but I am old enough to vote at 18? somewhere I am missing the logic.

Abortion? Not my call...but I defy anyone to show me in the constitution of the USA that abortion is and should be legal. takes a vivid stretch of the imagination to hold that the privacy rights in the constitution extend to justify abortion on call.

Drugs? A morality call..and I have problems with those who pass laws to protect me from myself.

Incest is an ancient taboo that has been prevalent among most societies because even the ancients recognized that interbreeding caused problems. But then there were some cultures that
not only condoned but required brother/sister marriages from their royalty..such as the Egyptians. Of course that might and probably does explain why so many mummies of Pharaohs had holes drilled in their heads..had to let those demons out...

I am rambling apologies. I seem to be doing it today

Becky said...

Fantastic post, Lou. Don't put that mouth guard in just yet! You're on a roll.

Bag Blog said...

Buck, I'm not sure I follow your feelings and the Japanese connection. I do understand that the Japanese did not have a great history of human rights. They made Hilter look like a lamb. Barbaric comes to mind. Of course those thoughts come from someone raised in a Christian based country. I loved the link. Maybe someday people will look back on this era of abortion and think "how barbaric; I'm glad we came to our senses."

guyk, you always have some interesting thoughts and sometimes they crack me up.

Becky, Thanks, I'm ready for that mouth guard now.

Mezzo, thanks for the support.

Buck said...

Buck, I'm not sure I follow your feelings and the Japanese connection.

My point in bringing up Japan is/was there are no moral absolutes, only cultural norms. And the fact that my personal values were in direct conflict with the cultural values of the Japanese on the one (narrow) issue of abortion. It's a strange feeling to be in a VERY small minority, especially when it comes to an issue you perceive to be black and white, with absolutely NO shades of gray.