So I spent last Saturday night, like I always do: in the tub, surrounded by candles and lotions, and cradled by Pasqual, my Ecuadorian houseboy - as he sang a broken-English version of "Your Body is a Wonderland." But this time was different, for I had the television tuned into Rick Warren`s "Civil Forum," which I had assumed was like Penthouse Forum, but with muskets.
Sadly, but predictably; I was wrong. Instead it had our two presidential candidates facing off on faith and other matters. One such matter was evil – which may be the most defining issue not simply for this election, but like, forever. That`s because despite the existence of forces in the world bent on killing you and me, Barack prefers to see evil in Darfur and well, ourselves.
Darfur, of course, is an easy choice because no one is a fan of genocide. It`s an answer that will offend no one. But the second part of the answer reveals, that unlike McCain, Obama is a fearful relativist – too timid to point out tangible evil for fear it may make him look rigid and uncool. See, these days, saying there is such thing as good and evil is the philosophical equivalent of shouting at the neighbor kids who just peed on your lawn.
McCain had no problem identifying evil - he`s seen it firsthand. But with Obama, evil is simply a justifiable response to our own country's flaws. We shouldn't be surprised by this - after 9/11, Obama always seemed more fascinated with casting blame on the victims of that perpetrated evil, than punishing the clowns who perpetrated it.
In the end, that's what drives his beliefs - that before America can fight evil, it must first address its own evil nature, to regain the all-important moral high ground that he thinks we have lost. But what he fails to see, is that evil doesn't care if you've got moral high ground. Do you really think Russia would not have invaded Georgia, had the Gitmo scandal never happened?
"Greg, Obama is a post-modern lightweight who can`t face the innate nature of man, and the delusions of his own flimsy beliefs," Pasquel said to me, while patting me down with a thick, white terrycloth towel.
Well said, Pasquel. It's so nice to see those Rosetta Stone CD's are finally paying off! [42 comments]
"Do you really think Russia would not have invaded Georgia, had the Gitmo scandal never happened?"
-No, but I am 100% sure that the September 11th attacks wouldn't have happened if we didn't interfere in the affairs of Muslim fundamentalist countries. Isn't that a little more relevant?
Greg said:
So I spent last Saturday night, like I always do: in the tub, surrounded by candles and lotions, and cradled by Pasqual, my Ecuadorian houseboy - as he sang a broken-English version of "Your Body is a Wonderland.".
Sounds like a hell of a party!, How did you keep your mind on anything else
No, see, there's moral absolutism and moral relativism. Curiously enough, it can only be one or the other. Obama, in the grand tradition of the liberal Left, is a relativist, while McCain is an absolutist.
I personally prefer absolutism, seeing how it saves so much more time and effort.
Well sure it does, but you understand that saving time and effort leads to more evil?
So is your primary concern with promoting the narrow interests of the USA regardless of the harm it may bring to the rest of the world (and how it may come back to chomp us firmly on the ass) or are you concerned with actually reducing the amount of evil and harm in the world.
If your concern is the promotion of the narrow self interest of the USA then all arguments about the evil of Putin, the Sudanese central government or even those of Stalinism are out the window, except to the extent that they serve said narrow self interest.
You can if you reflect for a moment, see that this really does lead to some very dark places. in fact, look around you now.
said:
but you understand that saving time and effort leads to more evil?
Another word for "saving time and effort" is "efficiency." Surely efficiency is a thing to be prized, isn't it?
I would argue that not all kinds of efficiency lead to more evil, just some. The key is in assembling the absolutes properly.
My biggest gripe about relativism is that it creates room for weasling, for exceptions that shouldn't be made but that manage to twist precedent. It is like a picket fence instead of a solid wall.
"Efficient" and "in a hurry" are not the same thing.
For instance, my manager expects me to do a job good enough that the customer feels that the $12.25 that he spent on his car wash was worth it, but at the same time expects me to do this job in less than a minute. In order to meet both requirements, I must work fast and well. And that, my friend, is efficiency.
the absolutistic view of good and evil has nothing to do with efficiency. it is a system bred out of laziness and for ideological polariation purposes.
the absolutistic view on good an evil has the same relation to reality like phrenology to neurology, geocentrism to heliocentrism, alchemy to chemistry, prayer-healing to medicine, excorcism to psychology, praying for a good harvest to professional agriculture.
Anonymous said:
the absolutistic view on good an evil has the same relation to reality like phrenology to neurology, geocentrism to heliocentrism, alchemy to chemistry, prayer-healing to medicine, excorcism to psychology, praying for a good harvest to professional agriculture.
Loading
Click to