Thinking Creatively in Fighting for Morals

Catholics, knowing that certain actions are morally wrong, usually argue against such actions primarily from a moral standpoint. Such concern for morality is laudable; however, an overemphasis on strictly moral arguments can prove to be counterproductive. 

For it is very difficult to argue that certain actions are morally wrong to people who reject absolute truth. Try arguing that 2+2=4 with a person who rejects the very notion of addition. Obviously, there is a need to inculcate a notion of absolute truth in a society which has rejected the concept. In the meantime, there is also a need to find alternate methods/arguments to combat moral problems.

And one method, quite simply, is to shine a bright light on the inner workings of immoral actions. Morally wrong actions or decisions, at their core, are disgusting on simple reflection. For example, contraception is also the practice of sticking rubber onto the most intimate places on the body or ingesting chemicals to "safely" engage in intimate acts and shut down natural biological functions.  

Contraception is morally wrong – but that fact stops few from engaging in it. Many things are morally wrong (stealing, lying, etc.); that doesn’t stop people from doing them. Contraception's innate ickiness - few consider that element.

Emphasizing the innate nastiness of certain moral evils would go a long way towards the eradication (or at least the decrease) of those evils. Pornography is perhaps the most obvious instance where this strategy could be utilized. At least from an argumentative standpoint, the problem with porn isn’t that it is morally wrong, per se. The problem with porn is that it is an admission of cowardice and failure on the part of the user.

The solitary porn addict essentially admits that he or she isn’t man or woman enough for a real relationship. The male porn addict has only the cold computer screen to give him temporary relief from his sexual desires. The female porn addict admits that the only way she can attract those she desires is in her fantasies. Solitary porn is an admission of failure – the failure to be alluring, the failure to attract.

Couples that use porn to “spice up their sex lives” are no better. Essentially, they are saying by their porn usage that they take their cues from others to enjoy sex, without discovering the joys of the act on their own. It’s like a twisted and more harmful version of adopting mannerisms and speech from movies; imagine a woman whose small talk consisted solely of Star Wars quotes.

Yes, morality should be inculcated. But due to our fallen human nature, humans are rarely influenced solely by moral concerns; few humans are reachable solely through reason. Christians seeking a moral society should appeal to the heart and to the head; to the gag reflex and to the conscience. 

Blowing Up Foolish Memes, Libertarian Edition

Recently, I stumbled across this little gem of what is a clearly libertarian meme regarding social issues. Quoted in full, it reads:

Don’t like gay marriage? Don’t get one.

Don’t like cigarettes? Don’t smoke one.

Don’t like abortions? Don’t have one.

Don’t like sex? Don’t do it.

Don’t like drugs? Don’t do them.

Don’t like porn? Don’t watch it.

Don’t like guns? Don’t buy one.

Don’t like your rights taken away?

Then don’t take away anyone else’s.

The meme implicitly argues that "solitary" vices hurt no one, and thus should be allowed by society.

Is this a compelling argument? Not if you take it to its logical conclusion. Here are some other examples of similar, “solitary” vices.

Don’t like suicide? Don’t commit one!

Don’t like bulimia? Don’t binge eat and throw up!

Don’t like cutting? Don’t cut yourself!

Don’t like gluttony? Don’t overeat!

Don’t like the choking game? Don’t play it!

These vices, like the previous vices (at least, the vices among them; guns, sex, and cigarettes are not vices) harm no one except the practitioner. Should individuals simply be allowed to engage in these activities without criticism?

The answer is obviously no, because self-harm is not a fundamental human right. One does not have the “right” to hurt himself. It is a moral duty and a spiritual work of mercy to warn people (at the very least) of when they are engaging in self-destructive behavior.

But the argument fails on a deeper level. Human beings do not exist in a vacuum. Our every action (good, bad, and neutral) affects others for good or for ill. If we harm ourselves through our failures, those around us are harmed as well. Thus, the Christian refusal to accept "solitary" moral evil is beneficial and even necessary for society. 

Like other slogans such as “love is love” and “government in the bedroom,” the “don’t like this, don’t do this” meme is a lazy emotional appeal masquerading as cogent argument.

I Believe in a God of Love

I believe in a God of love.

I believe that God loves every single one of His creatures with an infinite, burning love, and that He wants all His human creatures to be with Him in Heaven forever.

That is precisely why I cannot support “popular” moral evils, such as homosexual activity.

For I believe He would not have bothered to warn us about Hell if such a place did not exist. (Mark 9:47-48) I also take Him at His word that those who stubbornly commit moral evil (including “popular” moral evil) will face eternal consequences.

I also believe that God is not a liar. I take Him at his word when He says that the gate to heaven is narrow. (Matt 7:13)

God does not lie to us. He loves us too much to do so.

And nor should His followers ignore Christ's warnings and lie to their fellow men about moral evil.

Thus, telling someone that something forbidden by God is acceptable is not love at all, but cowardice. If I tell a murderer that his actions are acceptable, I am lying.

This is true of all moral evil. Telling someone that homosexual actions are acceptable (NOT homosexuality per se, which is disordered but not evil) is not love, but a dereliction of duty. As a Christian, if I am asked whether evil is evil, I must not lie.

Many will accuse me of judgment. But I have not judged these behaviors to be evil – God has already done so. What God has already judged as wrong, I must oppose with Him.

And so, as a Christian, I will love you with every fiber of my being, no matter who you are or what you have done. I will give you anything that you ask me for (so far as the law of God allows) if you request it.

But as a Christian, I cannot lie to you and say that moral evil is acceptable, just as I could not justifiably lie to you in calling black white.

And if I or any Christian were to do so, that would be an expression of cowardice, not love.

This post also appeared on the New Agora. Check us out!