If you find this article informative and worthwhile, please support my work by donating if you can.

logo    Morality and America's Morality Movement


A substantial group of Americans are pursuing issues that they loosely term moral, and their claim to the use of this adjective seems to have been accepted unquestionably; yet it has never been subjected to any critical analysis. So let's talk about morality.

Ethics and morality have been studied by human beings for thousands of years, so it is not something we dont know much about. And there are some special moral maxims that are very well know.

One of the earliest, and one that most people are familiar with, is the Golden Rule, which in ordinary language says, Treat others in ways that you would want them to treat you. Although most people think this is a good rule for moral behavior, even as an adolescent, I did not. And one summer, in Catholic Bible school, I said so to the nun who was our teacher. She replied by asking me if I could propose a better one. I quickly replied with, Treat others better than you would want them to treat you. She admitted that that was a better rule but thought that people would never abide by it, and I told her, in reply, that I didnt see many people abiding by the Golden Rule.

Some parts of the Ten Commandments are also cited as moral maxims: The last six Commandmentshonoring one's father and mother and censuring killing, adultery, stealing, lying, and coveting can easily serve as a rudimentary ethical system. And they are not bad rules, but I don't believe that they amount to a full fledged moral system. And they, too, are not followed very closely even by those who claim to have adopted them.

Another well-known moral system is Utilitarianism, which can be paraphrased by saying, Act so that the result is the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. The major problem with this system is measuring happiness. How can anyone do that?

And then there is, perhaps, the summum bonum of ethical maximsKant's Categorical Imperative which can be paraphrased as, Never treat a human being as a means to an end, but always treat him as the beneficent object of your action.

Now although none of these moral maxims have had wide-spread acceptance, any of them would be better than adopting no moral maxim at all. And it is this lack of a clearly stated moral maxim on the part of America's moral right that bothers me. Just what morality are they attempting to legislate into acceptance?

As far as I can tell, only two issues concern them: abortion and homosexuality. But let's play a game.

Suppose that abortion and acknowledged homosexuality were made illegal. How would either of these acts improve the moral climate in America?

Would either reduce the lying and cheating that is so prevalent in our society?

Would either decrease the amount of crime in our society?

Would either reduce the number of children being raised in poverty or in one parent homes or provide them with greater access to nutritious diets and access to medical care and even basic safety?

Would either reduce the number of hardships our elderly often face?

Would either reduce the use of controlled substances and the disastrous effects their use often has?

All of these and others, too, are moral issues, and the adoption of any one of the moral maxims mentioned above would have an effect on all of them, but outlawing abortion and homosexual behavior would not affect a since one.

So what does the claim that these proponents of a moral America amount to?

I don't know, but it certainly isn't morality. At best, its a morality that is relative to their own peculiar predilections. To call these people proponents of morality or to even allow them to call themselves proponents of morality is such a gross indifference to truth and such a fundamental misuse of language that it is itself grossly immoral.

So just as thieves often attempt to clothe their thefts in robes of virtue, so too the sinful attempt to dress themselves in suits of moral armor. But it's all show. None of it is real. (8/14/2005)