Flexible Morality

For a long time now, I've used the term "flexible morality" to describe something that I see as a major source of problems in our world. I'm sure I didn't invent the term but I use it more than anyone I know because I think it really fits what I see around me. It's basically like hypocrisy but the subtle distinction is the focus on right and wrong. The way I use the term, I define it as people who judge morality and right and wrong based on their own set of internal standards but then make exceptions for contradictory behavior when the behavior is something they like to engage in. Again, very much like being a hypocrite except that I see it as particular to issues of human conduct whereas hypocrisy cuts more broadly across human thought and behavior. For example, you can preach about how fat Americans are becoming but then eat terribly yourself. That's hypocrisy but not flexible morality.

An example of flexible morality is something like what's happened at St. Joseph's Catholic School in Wakefield Massachusetts. This school has banned all Harry Potter books from its library because it does not believe that the children should be exposed to magic and withcraft as these things are apparently evil. My guess is that the school is not banning the Bible, which is also chock full of magic and witchcraft. Most of the spells in the Harry Potter books are pretty tame compared to the Bible which turns water into wine, raises the dead, and gives sight back to blind people. The Bible has demons, plagues, incest, cruxifiction, homosexuality, bestiality, slavery, prostitution, and alcoholism. And those are pretty much the non-magical parts. Again, flexible morality. A book containing magic and witchcraft is fine as long as it promulgates the mythology that I happen to believe in.

Some of the conservative commentors who seem to garner a lot of press these days are also prime examples of this flexible morality. Most people have heard of Ann Coulter, the statuesque blonde attorney famous for her right wing rants and blistering critiques of liberals. Ann talks alot about conservative values and laments the erosion of Christian ideals that she believes laid the foundation of this country. She appears to be anti-semitic and anti-homosexual. I'm sure she would point to her faith as the source of many of her beliefs. And Ann Coulter is single. I believe I've seen her birth year listed as 1961 which would make her a 46 year old virgin, correct? I mean, you can't be Christian and spout off about traditional values and then engage in sexual relations with men you're not married to, can you? And certainly you can't use birth control, right? And I'm sure Ann's never been drunk either. So I guess that once again it is okay to preach about what's right and moral but then make some kind of excuses when your own behavior deviates.

I don't know Ann Coulter. Maybe she is a virgin. I doubt it. In fact, I'd bet that she's probably pretty wild in the sack. I think a lot of these conservatives are. Or maybe people just hope they are...for their sake. Nobody should really live a human life as uptight as some of these people appear to be.

There are countless examples of people on both sides of the political spectrum who want to pontificate on how to behave and then don't obey their own standards. And it's not just famous people. More than 90% of people in this country claim to believe in God. Despite this, 40% of women will be victims of domestic violence, 20% or more of the population abuses drugs or alcohol in some form, and a staggering percentage of our children are born out of wedlock. Logic suggests that there are only a few explanations for this. People either don't truly believe in God or they do believe but their faith is not strong enough to alter their behavior. If their faith isn't strong enough to alter behavior, then I really call into question their belief. After all, what is faith without behavior prescribed by it? It's easy to believe in God if you can still get drunk, whore around, and swear like a truck driver. Much harder to really live according to your faith. I see very few people who do this.

I know, people will say "Well, we're only human and we have failings and weaknesses. Even God doesn't expect us to be perfect. That's why there's forgiveness." I think this is letting people off too easy. It's an excuse to simply behave the way we want to but still profess a belief in a higher power. If I saw people doing things that contradicted their moral stance and then legitimately feel bad about it and try to change their behavior, then I could accept this argument of people stumbling. But for most people, the consistent pattern of their behavior suggests that they see no problem in these inherent contradictions. George Bush vehemently opposes abortion and stem cell research but has absolutely no problem with the death penalty. So human life is apparently sacred only before birth?

I'm tired of people acting in this contradictory fashion. I think that's why I've been a bit more blunt lately. People famously like to say that things aren't black and white but I think that is not true. Things are actually black and white. People just don't like it that way. I you espouse a belief in a certain religion, you should behave according to those beliefs. If some of the behavioral prescriptions of the belief offend you, than maybe you need to reconsider your faith. The truth is that you have to be consistent in you behavior and beliefs. Even if you're wrong, be consistently wrong. I know I am. It's true that we're not perfect and none of us are consistent all the time but the people I respect the most are the ones who perpetually evaluate their beliefs and behaviors to look for, and address, incongruities. People who don't do this are merely spouting off and they are worth neither our attention nor our respect.