Morality and Justice Held Hostage
In this age of political correctness, there seems to be a complete absence of right and wrong. Not every viewpoint can be correct. Either human life can exist without oxygen, or it can't. Yet there are those who would question the very existence of truth. It would appear that values, ideals and morals that have been accepted and needed universally, for over four thousand years, are now too restrictive, offensive or inhibitive, to be of any usefulness.
We are told that it is impossible to legislate morality, but every civilization on earth has successfully done so since the beginning of time. The similarities between the Code of Hammurabi, the Bible's ten commandments and most other pieces of social legislation, are quite staggering. Yet, there is a move to toss aside everything that could be considered a moral incumbrance, despite the obvious necessity for them. The members of various groups, scream loudly for the right, not only to voice their opinion, but also, to practice, teach and force the acceptance of it, upon all others. Many of these groups, would demand this freedom, at the cost of the rights of other's. One group is afraid of denying the rights of a few, while the other is fears, that groups which have no valid claim to such rights, will gain them, only to revoke their's. Both seem to seek the best interest of all concerned. However, those who seek political correctness towards all groups, clamor for all encompassing equality, where those who disagree, recognize that equality in everything, is not only impossible, but illogical as well. They argue that equal opportunity must be provided, but equality of standards cannot and must not be granted, to those whose lifestyles or actions are detrimental to the rest of the community. It is impractical to suppose that a convicted murderer should have the same rights as a teacher, or that a child should be given the right to choose whether or not to participate in sexual relations with a pedaphile. While one group seeks to imprison and revoke the rights, of those duly convicted of burglary, rape, child molestation, sodomy, and murder, the other goes to phenomenal expense, to protect such persons' rights. Homosexuals, child molesters, abortionists and criminals demand acceptance and complete equality, stating that they have as valid a claim as those who oppose them. Their opponents, on the other hand, point out that such views are in complete opposition to all that has been the basis for civilized society since the dawn of man.
There is a quite a difference between self-righteously passing judgment on something and simply noting it as unacceptable. Taking issue with someone's behavior or choices, should not condemn the person, but their actions. This may be difficult, especially when the choices are often of a very personal nature. However, the effort is well worth the difficulty. If one avoids unnecessarily making an enemy, one may gain an ally. Any debate on such issues, should have the person's best interest as its main focus. If there is any uncertainty about one's motives, then confrontation should be avoided, until one's purposes for it have been clarified. The acceptance of any and every ideology, alternative lifestyle and subjective set of ethics, leads only to confusion and eventually complete ruin of the society. Just as there must be someone who has the final word of authority, to prevent total chaos and anarchy in a business, classroom or nation, certain things are and must be, inherently wrong, to avoid wholesale destruction. Mankind's search for the middle ground between complete permissiveness and totalitarianism, must begin, with the same basic morality on which, this once great nation was founded.