American Morals
One of the more annoying aspects of our socio-political shenanigans over the years is the hyperbolic threat of ‘moral decay’. Both sides engage in it, in differing ways.
Republicans always portray liberal issues such as racism, abortion, LGBTQ rights, same sex marriage and immigration as ‘destroying the moral fabric’- the soul- of the nation. That Democrats support these issues is not disputed.
But, is it really ‘destroying the moral fabric’ of our ‘Christian’ nation’?
(Coincidentally, everything Democrats propose somehow falls into this category.)
So, it appears that much of Republicans case against Democrats is based on their damage to our morality by breaking God’s Law.
But, are Democrats making judgements about moral decay, too?
Well, yea.
About?
The way that Republicans are discriminating against minorities, immigrants, women, LGBTQs and constantly lying and misquoting the Bible and misrepresenting everything Democrats do so they can call them immoral.
Yes, Dems say that it’s immoral to oppress people you don’t like, lie about your opponents, lie to your constituents, lie about the facts, bribe, cheat to stay in power and pass laws that restrict and harm people over personal behavior deemed religiously immoral.
I know. What gall, right?
Well, if we’re going to look for the source of our ‘moral decay’, we first have to know what the hell our morality is.
Our morality, any morality, of course, is our sense of right vs wrong. The US has two dominating schools;
‘Conservative Moral Values’- ’Family’, ’traditional’, American, ‘Christian’- all buzzwords for Biblical law.
‘Liberal Moral Values’- ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’, ‘humane’, ‘equality’- all buzzwords for secular law.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with any of the words. They all, in fact, work really well together. Because, of course they do. They have to. They’re just platitudes. It’s the application of what they stand for in real life that counts.
The crux of the Democratic argument is that the Constitution grants equal behavioral freedom- inalienable rights- so long as it isn’t harmful. The moral imperative is to do no harm, and to be fair and honest.
The crux of the Republican argument is that the Bible licenses the Constitution, and Biblical morals must be law. The moral imperative is to ensure loyalty by punishing those considered immoral.
The Bible only informs the Declaration and the Constitution at a very fundamental level, as part of the vernacular and vocabulary of the 18th Century. The Founders were also likely versed in Greek, Roman and European literature, the philosophies of the Renaissance, and, even St. Thomas Aquinas’ ‘Scholasticism’- the theory that the existence of God can be proven by natural phenomena.
Just attending the historically iconic universities of their time- Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale- would have yielded knowledge of all these subjects, and variously covering them in English, Latin, Greek and even some French.
One Founder- Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, famously constructed his own ‘Bible’, painstakingly cutting and matching Bible text from English, French, and Latin/Greek translations, while omitting any references to divinity or miracles. He called it ‘The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth’. His moral sense was affirmed by Christ’s words and doctrines, rather than His divinity. His likely most famous quote about religion is “It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
From studies such as these, they gleamed an understanding of universal moral axioms. Every faith and philosophy, for instance, has some version of ‘do unto others as you’d have them do unto you’- an admonition to do no harm, at some level.
But the Founders also saw that there was a point where religious law transgressed universal axioms, and regulated moral behavior more…. speculatively.
Once the trappings of dogma are attached, universal axioms become subservient and situational.
And, this is why the Founders wanted the separation of church and state, so that the nation would be founded on universal morals rather than religion. The US legal code follows suit, being based mostly on harm, damage and danger, rather than beliefs.
The exceptions in that law that govern private behavior and allow discrimination, though, are many, and some, horrific, but they are slowly being removed and changed as we evolve through them. Bad laws, like Jim Crow, systemically active even years after repeal, are slowly being purged. It’s a long, arduous and sometimes unseen process, but it is happening. The US is becoming more pluralistic, not less.
One of the nicer aspects of the Constitution- it allows us to update it as our moral turpitude improves.
On the whole, the idea is still sound and the basic moral foundation of the Constitution stands. Stripped of our meddling and abuse, its principles are still the best bet on the table. It’s our job to live up to them.
Being moral first means not doing harm, caring about others and how your actions affect them, and ultimately, helping people and preventing harm when you can. That’s good morals. That’s what all the best people do.
Simple? Why, it’s Newtonian as hell!!
This is what’s so jarring about today’s political battle. One side is waging it entirely through damaging, immoral actions- falsely accusing the other side of damaging immoral actions.
Between racist gerrymandering, LGBTQ restrictions, greedflation, abortion and immigration, the political and financial powers-that-be are strangling society, harming the nation, communities and individuals, aiding and abetting Republicans willing to do harm to win. All in the pursuit of power and profit.
Preventing this kind of despotic behavior is the most basic goal of the Founder’s USA experiment. The universal axioms of their time are condensed into a form of government that is made fair through representation and inalienable rights, and the law based on the will and safety of the people, applied equally.
I know, it’s not like we have that going on yet.
But, that is the basis of American morality. We are all equal, and we are all responsible to protect each other’s rights by first not infringing on them. We don’t have the right to harm others over their beliefs, or our judgment of their sins. If we did, then others would have the right to harm us as well.
The laws we’ve written regulate actions we take against each other. Religions regulate actions taken against God. Neither Christ nor the Founders saw them as one.
Don’t let the overlapping fool you. The Bible says ‘thou shalt not kill’ because, of course it does. So did everybody else. And they all had exceptions- if you’re the enemy, if you’re caught blaspheming, if you have sex out of wedlock (women only)- there are numerous offenses in the Old Testament that are punishable by death. For people who said ‘thou shalt not kill’, they sure had a lot of reasons to go ahead and do it anyway.
So, is that moral? Killing someone over an offense against God? Because they did. A lot. For centuries. I mean, Spanish conquistadors killed people who never heard of Christ for not knowing about Christ, for Christ’s sake. (No, literally. Think about it.)
So, when it comes to the political battle we face today, the Republicans are leaning heavily on Old Testament ‘morality’. They find it more morally repugnant that latin immigrants exist than that Texas has been putting chains with razor wire and buoys with saw blades across the Rio Grande to stop them from trying to cross.
Now, Christ did say specifically to be good to immigrants.
Republicans actions against moral offenders are more immoral than the offense. Say that three times real fast!
Democrats, meanwhile, don’t really have any of this nonsense going on. They just don’t. Love ’em, hate ‘em, they’re not making shit up and they are trying to help people. The issues they address are real.
Racism, abortion, anti-LGBTQ bias, reckless gun laws, abysmal immigration protocols, combating pollution, wage stagnation against rising cost of living, healthcare costs, dysfunctions in the voting process, fighting the rising threat of international fascism, controlling widespread inflation and monopolizing of industries which increases market volatility, addressing the cultural banning and restricting of books and courses in conservative state schools and universities- and that’s the short list.
All of these issues involve a related harm to the nation, the community, or to individuals, and all of the Democrats’ arguments are based on those same universal axioms of morality- fairness, equality, truth and responsibility to do no harm.
Republicans oppose them on every issue, and over precisely this ideological nonsense that pervades their party. They use the same words- fairness, equality, truth and responsibility, but to very different ends. Fair, to their privilege, equal, except for those guys, true, because they say so, and their responsibility is to punish misbehavior. They are oblivious or apathetic to the harm they cause.
It’s almost required nowadays that I point out some equal failing or misbehavior by Democrats, which I could do, as there are always some bad apples in every bushel. That doesn’t change the content of the whole party’s bills and speeches, which at the very least, generally aspire to these morals.
I don’t want to sound like I’m deifying Democrats for some higher nobility, either, nor excessively demonizing the Republicans for having less. (Although, not demonizing them is pretty hard once you’ve started quoting them.)
Rather, following these axioms is the opening requirement. Democrats are at least trying to do their jobs, and seem to have no reason to invent problems- there’s enough real ones as it is. Republicans are wasting time inventing exaggerated emotional and intangible problems and proposing laws that affect behavior and social activity, but solve nothing at street level.
So, if there really is such a thing as ‘American morality’, this is it- doing no harm, respecting each other’s rights, and acting in the best interest of the individuals, the community and the nation, honestly, and in good faith. (How’s that for some lofty shit?)
Democrats are visibly trying to follow it, and Republicans are visibly trying to redefine it.
Thing is, the Declaration, the Constitution and the Gospels all point to those same universal axioms. Don’t do harm, help when you can. We Americans can add ‘don’t vote to harm, vote to help’.
And, if everybody lives that way under a government based on these axioms, then there’s no need for a national religion, as virtually every religion espouses these axioms somehow as well. And little reason for political parties to be so bipolar. Common understanding of these principles is crucial to a healthy society- a free people and a strong nation.
Now, we can admit that we don’t have it down yet, and that its going to take a while to get there, but the basic universal moral code that inspires the Constitution is the right path, and as long as we’re on it, we’re heading to the moral high road.
It’s not paved, but it goes where we want to be.
C.2024 Cousin B
(P.S.- This is the last in an opening salvo of background pieces establishing my positions in future essays. From here on out, we’ll be talking about things that are happening or relevant. - CB)
