Dear America,
"Live in the sunshine,
swim the sea,
drink the wild air's salubrity."
Ralph Waldo Emerson
blog #981
subject: subjective morality, an oxymoron for the ages
Isn't is crazy how some people deem the creation of a structure -- aka building a wall -- between sovereign nations as immoral; all the while, the very same people would allow the mother, of an unborn child -- to go full term, even to the day of it's birth -- her choice to kill it, no matter if such a child is in or outside the womb. The act of killing this itty bitty baby, who is clearly able to live outside the womb for what could be a very long life, is reduced to no more than a woman's right to choose her own sense of morality right there on the spot.
The person responsible for the gift of sperm -- the man -- has no say.
The baby -- even at nine months in the womb -- has no say.
But what does it say, as a culture?
Of course, after 980 blogs -- this isn't the first time this subject has reared it's ugly head, or shall we use the term crowned? I may even be so bold to say, this subject separates conservatives from liberals without prejudice -- albeit justly, squarely, and with great objectivity. But no surprise there, right.
Anywho, let's say it again -- just what does it say, about US, as a culture? What does this rather repugnant, grisly, insufferable choice say about the United States, as a nation?
Governor Northam, by trade just prior to politician, a Pediatric Neurologist, said this, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” It doesn't matter that the context, supposedly was after a failed abortion...it doesn't matter.
What matters is the matter struggling for life; the life that would be, conceivably, by process, snuffed out in an instant -- just because it's what the mother and the family desire. Um. In such a case -- wouldn't it be more morally sound to let this little baby be adopted by a couple longing to raise a baby of their own? But also, what he says there doesn't even make sense...the infant would be "resuscitated" only to have this same baby ultimately killed? What?
But let's get back on the subject, shall we?
About this subjective morality thing...that's a good one, isn't it?
But this describes our world, precisely. And we kinda all do it, don't we, to some degree or another.
A preacher who I love listening to from time to time, Robert Morris, has just begun a series of sermons that has begun with a discussion on this very idea, and poses nearly at the start a question -- why do you lock your doors at night?
um to stay safe and sound, um, like, all night long?
indeed.
why?
because for some people, breaking into another person's home and stealing other people's things, and maybe even snatching the life-force out of what might otherwise be an able bodied citizen minding his own business, is all morally acceptable.
Even though moral law was firmly spelled out upon a couple of famous tablets thousands of years ago, eventually becoming part and parcel of America's Rule of Law, if not, essentially, part and parcel of every civilized nation's good governance -- the adherence to such a moral code of behavior under what is known as "thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal" has nearly become as subjective as the what to wear for the day or the making of the decision to keep a baby or kill it. It's just a choice we make.
It's just a choice we make. It's totally subjective from one girl or boy to the next....ladi dah, ladi dah
When we give it euphemistic characteristics, like freedom of choice and right to decide, what does it matter what happens? It's just a choice someone makes for his/herself. It's free will in action.
And if that's the case, then why punish anyone for anything if the subjectivity of everything creates the very conditions where the ultimate choice of things is not only immorally based upon how someone feels -- essentially being highly emotional -- but carries the potential to bring death of another soul, whether the unborn child, or newborn baby, or the girl next door. Why have law, why have punishment, if upon some occasions some law becomes subjective to a moment, a condition -- be it an unwanted human being, or what have you? Are we now going to argue at what age is it okay to kill a human, be it a newborn or ninety. Oh right, we are doing that already, see also, death with dignity.
Same with immigration -- we have a law in place; some people follow it, while other immigrants don't? Who is on the right side of the law and who is not? What could be more fair than for all people to follow the same law?
Where is our clear and objective view of what is right and what is wrong, and where does it come from? And for real -- let's ask ourselves -- just how black and white is it?
For starters, God gave us a guide because He IS a Loving God -- and wants His people, His children, to live not only in His image, but act accordingly. These commandments were designed to mold us into being better humans on earth, better caretakers of this planet, and better neighbors with one another, whether it be right next door, or across town, or across the border within the borders of an entirely separate and sovereign nation, like, Mexico.
You know, Mexico keeps firm its stance on immigration, and applies their law, fairly and squarely.
Good fences make good neighbors; sound moral code makes sound law makes secure people all the way around the world. "Obedience always brings blessing," as according to another preacher, Charles F. Stanley, and his Life Principles to Live By, #21.
You know, some of the same people who would seem fit to morally decide to abort a baby, even at full term, may be the same people who carefully escort a wayward spider out the door, or don't eat meat, just because, you know, to kill a cow or lamb is just simply wrong. I know, my apologies for that link. ugh.
It's just helps me make my point.
We can't kill the baby lamb chops but we can kill any human baby, anytime, anywhere. [and just to be clear, God gave man dominion over the animals, according to the Bible; not to be cruel, but the Bible told us what to eat, and hamburgers were included.]
Their logic makes no sense.
One of the final points made by Robert Morris on Sunday went something like this: "God created you with a mind to think, a heart to feel, and a [free]will to choose. [And what you do with these gifts] determines your destiny."
On a grander scale, what America chooses to do with her gifts of mind, body and soul -- collectively -- is who we are, determining America's destiny.
We must be mindful, compassionate, and smart with our choices from top to bottom, east to west, side by side, thoughtfully and objectively and lawfully, in accordance to a sound moral code, without exception, without blurring the lines. Or else, quite honestly and brutally, why have lines at all?
sure, and who am I, right?
I'm just a girl with one world view living next door to another girl with another world view; we might have some things in common, and we might have some things in stark disagreement. There is that.
But the thing is -- America became awfully successful at melting together a rather diverse people, of various world views, because the one thing its people had very much in common within the commons was a life lived under God, first and foremost. And the breaking away from this Truth, this Life, this Word, this Law, and especially, this LOVE, has made all the difference, for better or worse, and mostly worse.
An objective return to Love God and love the law is probably the right thing to do, as simply a good place to start. And start over, we must.
And it starts with you and me making good choices all the live long day.
Make it a Good Day, G
Isn't is crazy how some people deem the creation of a structure -- aka building a wall -- between sovereign nations as immoral; all the while, the very same people would allow the mother, of an unborn child -- to go full term, even to the day of it's birth -- her choice to kill it, no matter if such a child is in or outside the womb. The act of killing this itty bitty baby, who is clearly able to live outside the womb for what could be a very long life, is reduced to no more than a woman's right to choose her own sense of morality right there on the spot.
The person responsible for the gift of sperm -- the man -- has no say.
The baby -- even at nine months in the womb -- has no say.
But what does it say, as a culture?
Of course, after 980 blogs -- this isn't the first time this subject has reared it's ugly head, or shall we use the term crowned? I may even be so bold to say, this subject separates conservatives from liberals without prejudice -- albeit justly, squarely, and with great objectivity. But no surprise there, right.
Anywho, let's say it again -- just what does it say, about US, as a culture? What does this rather repugnant, grisly, insufferable choice say about the United States, as a nation?
Governor Northam, by trade just prior to politician, a Pediatric Neurologist, said this, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.” It doesn't matter that the context, supposedly was after a failed abortion...it doesn't matter.
What matters is the matter struggling for life; the life that would be, conceivably, by process, snuffed out in an instant -- just because it's what the mother and the family desire. Um. In such a case -- wouldn't it be more morally sound to let this little baby be adopted by a couple longing to raise a baby of their own? But also, what he says there doesn't even make sense...the infant would be "resuscitated" only to have this same baby ultimately killed? What?
But let's get back on the subject, shall we?
About this subjective morality thing...that's a good one, isn't it?
But this describes our world, precisely. And we kinda all do it, don't we, to some degree or another.
A preacher who I love listening to from time to time, Robert Morris, has just begun a series of sermons that has begun with a discussion on this very idea, and poses nearly at the start a question -- why do you lock your doors at night?
um to stay safe and sound, um, like, all night long?
indeed.
why?
because for some people, breaking into another person's home and stealing other people's things, and maybe even snatching the life-force out of what might otherwise be an able bodied citizen minding his own business, is all morally acceptable.
Even though moral law was firmly spelled out upon a couple of famous tablets thousands of years ago, eventually becoming part and parcel of America's Rule of Law, if not, essentially, part and parcel of every civilized nation's good governance -- the adherence to such a moral code of behavior under what is known as "thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal" has nearly become as subjective as the what to wear for the day or the making of the decision to keep a baby or kill it. It's just a choice we make.
It's just a choice we make. It's totally subjective from one girl or boy to the next....ladi dah, ladi dah
When we give it euphemistic characteristics, like freedom of choice and right to decide, what does it matter what happens? It's just a choice someone makes for his/herself. It's free will in action.
(Ever think about making the better choice in the first place, as in, using birth control? Or further, taking personal responsibility for our actions, for another life we make? whatever...I digress in the cesspool of the rising victim-hood nation)
And if that's the case, then why punish anyone for anything if the subjectivity of everything creates the very conditions where the ultimate choice of things is not only immorally based upon how someone feels -- essentially being highly emotional -- but carries the potential to bring death of another soul, whether the unborn child, or newborn baby, or the girl next door. Why have law, why have punishment, if upon some occasions some law becomes subjective to a moment, a condition -- be it an unwanted human being, or what have you? Are we now going to argue at what age is it okay to kill a human, be it a newborn or ninety. Oh right, we are doing that already, see also, death with dignity.
Same with immigration -- we have a law in place; some people follow it, while other immigrants don't? Who is on the right side of the law and who is not? What could be more fair than for all people to follow the same law?
Where is our clear and objective view of what is right and what is wrong, and where does it come from? And for real -- let's ask ourselves -- just how black and white is it?
For starters, God gave us a guide because He IS a Loving God -- and wants His people, His children, to live not only in His image, but act accordingly. These commandments were designed to mold us into being better humans on earth, better caretakers of this planet, and better neighbors with one another, whether it be right next door, or across town, or across the border within the borders of an entirely separate and sovereign nation, like, Mexico.
You know, Mexico keeps firm its stance on immigration, and applies their law, fairly and squarely.
Good fences make good neighbors; sound moral code makes sound law makes secure people all the way around the world. "Obedience always brings blessing," as according to another preacher, Charles F. Stanley, and his Life Principles to Live By, #21.
You know, some of the same people who would seem fit to morally decide to abort a baby, even at full term, may be the same people who carefully escort a wayward spider out the door, or don't eat meat, just because, you know, to kill a cow or lamb is just simply wrong. I know, my apologies for that link. ugh.
It's just helps me make my point.
We can't kill the baby lamb chops but we can kill any human baby, anytime, anywhere. [and just to be clear, God gave man dominion over the animals, according to the Bible; not to be cruel, but the Bible told us what to eat, and hamburgers were included.]
Their logic makes no sense.
One of the final points made by Robert Morris on Sunday went something like this: "God created you with a mind to think, a heart to feel, and a [free]will to choose. [And what you do with these gifts] determines your destiny."
On a grander scale, what America chooses to do with her gifts of mind, body and soul -- collectively -- is who we are, determining America's destiny.
We must be mindful, compassionate, and smart with our choices from top to bottom, east to west, side by side, thoughtfully and objectively and lawfully, in accordance to a sound moral code, without exception, without blurring the lines. Or else, quite honestly and brutally, why have lines at all?
sure, and who am I, right?
I'm just a girl with one world view living next door to another girl with another world view; we might have some things in common, and we might have some things in stark disagreement. There is that.
But the thing is -- America became awfully successful at melting together a rather diverse people, of various world views, because the one thing its people had very much in common within the commons was a life lived under God, first and foremost. And the breaking away from this Truth, this Life, this Word, this Law, and especially, this LOVE, has made all the difference, for better or worse, and mostly worse.
An objective return to Love God and love the law is probably the right thing to do, as simply a good place to start. And start over, we must.
And it starts with you and me making good choices all the live long day.
Make it a Good Day, G
Posts
