Moral structure’s a lot like a building; it can protect you from the storm if constructed properly and attention’s paid to its maintenance. Or, it can provide a false sense of security falling to the first windstorm of detrimental circumstances testing the structure’s integrity. It’s a matter of how much attention was paid to the selection of the materials used in the construct.
Traditionally, western culture’s moral development was developed according to the tenets of Judeo-Christian ethics. We’re taught there were Ten Commandments to be followed. God gave them to Moses. They’ve since become the basis of many Judeo-Christian deviations from the traditional belief set learned by prior generations. The Ten Commandments are the hardwiring making this set of behaviors more a life-style choice than an experiment diverging when the whim strikes a person.
Where there were no more than a couple of translations of Biblical tracts in the dim recesses of human society, recently we see many people developing differing interpretations they cast about like nets seeking allies for their coming battles. Man wants his cake and to eat it as well. Many differing religious leaders place their theories at the feet of people hungry for nourishment of a spiritual nature moreso than a secular one. No two platforms exactly mirror each other. Pentecostals differ in their approach from Catholics and Lutherans. Baptists of the Southern variety are different in their views than African Methodist Episcopalians. The relative intensity of the religious instruction is a matter of the person accepting or rejecting what is taught through the doctrine.
Now, we have secular activity entering into the mix. Philosophy of a more earthly and non-spiritual nature looks to dilute the cement being mixed to develop the foundation of any religious/faith based shelter. These philosophies presume the ability of the individual to listen to a particular source and construct of “reason”. It presumes a desire to be swayed under the influence of the winds directed against the structure. This is advertised as helping a person to “see the logic” of a newer theory. This would allow for the modification of the base to fit a structure constantly evolving and building from change orders seen more as whimsical and transient than those based on solid architectural and engineering necessities. Where change orders may suit the fanciful desires pleasing the senses, the original engineering worked from a set of unchangeable and formerly unchallengeable beliefs. Eye candy isn’t nourishing as much as it momentarily appealing.
The truth of any of this is understood when a test is conducted against the structure as a whole: can it stand against the pressures placed on it from the forces of nature? Will the foundation crack and fail under the onslaught of forces hitting it and the erratic nature of the theories composing it?
Man changes everything he comes into contact with and not necessarily always for the good. Man interprets and voices his interpretations as new found fact occasionally.
Thou shalt not kill has been changed to thou shalt not commit murder. “Go forth and multiply” is argued as: unless it’s a matter of “women’s health”. Thou shalt not commit adultery, unless the heart knows the mind cannot reason against. Thou shalt not steal doesn’t address growing beliefs all is fair in love and war; this is then qualified to include business and industry. Man justifies bad behaviors where he once accepted the realities of shame in self and public, because there is always the next justification to move the issue further into the murk of man’s convoluted and self-centered logic stream.
Politicians justify their political and thus self-aggrandizing agendas to make it appear they have our best interests at heart. No matter the source of their theology; faith based or secular, religious or logic based; there will be controversy. The winds of change will buffet society’s structure and the integrity of the construction will tell how well society survives the winds of change.
How will America survive; by fundamental faith or the fluid development of logic? Will it be from a sense of what’s right; or a sense of justifying your own choices?
You decide what’s best for you.
Thanks for listening.