A Place of Safety
I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love.
Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving!
We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
















You are here: Home > Forum > A Place of Safety > General Talk > A Question of Moral Clarity ....
icon7.gif A Question of Moral Clarity ....  [message #19794] Sat, 14 February 2004 18:07 Go to next message
kevin is currently offline  kevin

On fire!
Location: Somewhere
Registered: September 2002
Messages: 1108




I wrote this for the newspapers, but I doubt it will make print. So I wanted to at least share it with you here.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Question of Moral Clarity

I wish I had moral clarity on many issues. I believe when we claim total moral clarity we deny ourselves the opportunity to expand, learn and grow. None of us can know everything. When we make that charge, we are using selective interpretation from our station in life and the limited personal experience we have had in our own life.

Martin Luther King said in a letter he wrote in a Birmingham jail “I am not afraid of tension. Non-violent tension is necessary for growth.”

That suggests to me that if we do not debate and discuss issues of morality, whether it is gay marriage, racial tension, gender issues, or just the right to love who we love, we do all mankind a disservice.

I believe we should all be involved. Myself as a progressive person, think it is a moral responsibility to be involved in the ways possible for me. Our intolerance, or more to the point our silence is by its very nature immoral.

I do not understand why a heterosexual person in Nebraska thinks that if I marry a man I am somehow harming their marriage or it’s institution. Wouldn’t the more that 50% of people that get divorced be a much larger threat by the assumption that one marriage can damage another?

One assertion I have heard is that it is far better for a child to be raised by a “traditional family unit” or by both a man and a woman. Isn’t a child being raised in a safe and loving environment much more important than gender?

I think it really is time we had this debate. I would like all to hear both sides articulate their respective points of view so that the general public can make an informed opinion. The dogma of sound bites is not a replacement for intellectual discussion.

So let’s have that discussion. It is an issue of civil rights. It is an issue of morality.



"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
icon7.gif Re: A Question of Moral Clarity ....  [message #19795 is a reply to message #19794] Sat, 14 February 2004 18:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
kevin is currently offline  kevin

On fire!
Location: Somewhere
Registered: September 2002
Messages: 1108




Whoops, the line was supposed to be:

Our intolerance for intolerance, or more to the point our silence is by its very nature immoral.



"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
icon7.gif OMG i did it again ....  [message #19796 is a reply to message #19795] Sat, 14 February 2004 18:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
kevin is currently offline  kevin

On fire!
Location: Somewhere
Registered: September 2002
Messages: 1108




It was supposed to be:

Our tolerance for intolerance, or more to the point our silence is by its very nature immoral.


Now I am done .... hehe



"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
Re: A Question of Moral Clarity ....  [message #19797 is a reply to message #19794] Sat, 14 February 2004 19:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ch.oo.lo is currently offline  ch.oo.lo

Toe is in the water
Location: Michigan, USA
Registered: August 2003
Messages: 49



This is going to come out wrong, I can tell, so I'm apologizing beforehand.

I think that you* talking about moral responsibilities and the like, in some ways make you no better than the ones you oppose. I personally think that morals/ethics are an individual thing, not something society should dictate (although it does).

(*The you was more of a general one, not individual)

That's not to say that I necessarily disagree with you, it's just that what you're doing is somewhat hypocritical. I don't think that mental discrimination/bias/whatever is immoral, but it is, in general, unconstitutional to act upon it or to deny a person rights because of that.

I'm done. Hopefully you'll understand what I mean. I'm not too good with words, sorry.

-Jeanne
icon7.gif You make a valid point ....  [message #19798 is a reply to message #19797] Sat, 14 February 2004 19:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
kevin is currently offline  kevin

On fire!
Location: Somewhere
Registered: September 2002
Messages: 1108




My point is that perhaps now IS the time for dialog from both sides.

But I would like you to expand as to how you think I am being hypocritical.


Just curious,

Kevin



"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
Re: You make a valid point ....  [message #19799 is a reply to message #19798] Sat, 14 February 2004 20:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ch.oo.lo is currently offline  ch.oo.lo

Toe is in the water
Location: Michigan, USA
Registered: August 2003
Messages: 49



i guess it was based off an assumption i made... i can't put it into words without actually being in a conversation with you (i'm weird like that). so i'll try to answer again later on.

jeanne
icon7.gif Kinda glad it didn't make print ....  [message #19803 is a reply to message #19794] Sun, 15 February 2004 12:11 Go to previous message
kevin is currently offline  kevin

On fire!
Location: Somewhere
Registered: September 2002
Messages: 1108




The New York times agreed it was far from my best work.

And after a bit of reflection I thought is sounded a bit preachy.


Hugs to all,

Kevin



"Be excellent to each other, and, party on dudes"!
Previous Topic: Happy St. Valentines day to all my family at APOS ...
Next Topic: Happy birthday Lenny!!!
Goto Forum: