This issue hinges on the question of whether we are a society governed by traditionally accepted moral principles or whether we are to accept the secular view that each person should decide what is moral or not based on their own viewpoint (moral relativism). The first concept allows us to formulate laws and codes of conduct that are simple and easy to understand and obey. The second makes for inconsistency and confusion resulting in a break down of society. Under moral relativism, Timothy McVeigh was justified in what he did because he felt it was his moral duty, the same with the 9/11 terrorists. A very slippery slope indeed.
For most Americans, the meaning of marriage is simply common sense. Marriage as the union of one man and one woman is at the heart of what most of us believe family should be. Even if we don’t all manage to live out that belief as perfectly as we would like, not everyone who opposes the redefinition of marriage to include homosexual couples has a detailed explanation for their position. Just because someone is divorced, for example, does not mean he or she does not believe in traditional marriage. Everyday folks understand that society needs strong ideals to bring out the...
- Quotes of the day Allahpundit 14 minutes ago
- DeBlasio faces three lawsuits for trying to shut down charter schools Mary Katharine Ham 54 minutes ago
- European countries to US: Give us your gas Erika Johnsen 2 hours ago
- Venezuelan protesters digging in for the long haul Erika Johnsen 3 hours ago
- “Walking Dead” grumble thread: Maybe we should talk about “True Detective” instead Allahpundit 4 hours ago
- Finally: Young liberals ready to explain the news to America Allahpundit 4 hours ago