Dear Friends,
It seems to me, moral relativism is an open door to the worst evil imaginable, and closing that door should be the first goal of every human being who seeks justice in our World. The theory of moral relativism is as pernicious as it is seductive however. This idea allows anything, no matter how heinous, to be called good, and it makes it possible to call the most human hearted things, evil. Actions, under this concept, should be judged in the social atmosphere of when and where they are done. This theory explicitly states, there is no objective good and no objective bad, only the context in which a thing happens is pertinent. This corrupting influence on mankind has led to untold human suffering and is leading us down the primrose path to far worse. Unless we unanimously call moral relativism what it is, evil, it will continue to lower the moral standard of humanity, reducing us to mere animals with no moral foundation for our thoughts and actions, opening the floodgates of every evil imaginable on mankind, propelled by our quickly advancing technology.
No one wants to be judged and moral relativism is seen as a means to keep others from judging us. This is one of the more attractive, and pernicious, aspects of moral relativism. Those that are enamored by this argument, usually claim that those who say there is an objective morality to human behavior, are judging them, and who are they to judge? This simplistic and sophist claim ignores the call by Jesus Christ, “Judge lest ye shall be judged.” The moral relativist thinks, or maybe just crassly claims, they are taking the moral high road, in not judging the actions of others. But then again, for there to be a moral high road, there must be objective morality. More and more we hear the moral relativist say, this or that economic, social or cultural ill, is unconscionable. Which is in fact making a moral judgment, showing them to be, at the very least, hypocrites and more likely, sophists. We see by their actions, if not their rhetoric, they seek to judge others without being judged.
The sophist claim that there is no overarching morality completely neglects human history in it’s entirety. In order to hold fast to moral relativism, one must forget all the lessons taught by human history, dooming us to relearn them. Never mind most were learned the hard way, and will be again, if we take up the mantle of moral relativism. Do we really want to relive the atrocities of human sacrifice? Is it in our children’s interests to go back to slavery? Do we want to live in a world that allows binding feet, eunuchs, feudal serfs, molesting children or forced prostitution? All these things, under moral relativism, are not immoral, because they must be considered in the context of the social and cultural situation in which they were, and are, done.
Objective morality must consider the wants, needs and feelings of all involved, to do otherwise is the very definition of evil. Objective morality takes all these things into account where moral relativism does not. If human sacrifice is a moral act, would you be happy to be the victim, if binding a person’s feet is good, would you want your feet bound, if slavery is a righteous act, depending on the cultural and social moors, would you want to be enslaved? Of course not! To argue so is piling absurdity on insanity and adding a cherry on top. No sane person would want these things done to themselves or a loved one. This fact alone, empirically proves that there is an overarching morality to human actions, disproving the theory of moral relativism completely.
Our technology is growing at an ever increasing pace. News accounts of the ability of science to do amazing things appear more and more often. Some of these things have the potential for great good, and some, horrific evil. Science fiction is filled with examples of the dark side of science. Even in the Victorian era there were warnings of the evil that could come from science, the Island of Dr. Moreau is but one example. Perhaps the most scary to me is the dark future that The Brave New World presents. Under the aegis of moral relativism the atrocities of Nazi doctors can be justified, and are… the darkest evil that can be imagined will be visited on mankind under conditions of moral relativism.
We human beings are a moral species all of us having that spark of good and evil in us. We nurse the good to our benefit and all mankind is blessed by that floodlight of goodness produced, but we feed the spark of evil to our peril, lest we are consumed by the ensuing inferno. Being flawed, we all do good and evil in our lives, and we all seek to escape being judged. Jesus commanded us to be moral, refraining from judging others, but the moral relativist calls us to be immoral while we are judging others. The ability of science to do good or evil, is based on the morality of the scientist, moral relativism removes the limit that morality places, unleashing the mad scientist to visit the greatest evils on humanity that can be envisioned by the most psychopathic minds. Moreover, if we remove the inhibitions that objective morality put on us, we are dooming our children to relearn the lessons of the past… So you see, it is not only our duty to dismiss moral relativism, but an imperative, lest we find ourselves trapped in a Brave New World of our own making… with no way to escape. God help us of we do.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
