This is one area where I most profoundly disagree with cultural libertarians. The more the state gets out of the business of policing the sin, the more the rest of the society needs to get into the business of condemning it....I agree with [Jonathan Rauch] entirely that some social deception is necessary to maintain a healthy society. But once the deception has been exposed, forcing everyone to take sides, everyone must in fact take sides. One can be humane or sympathetic, but they should also judge.(I think I know who edited this post.)
Why, Jonah? Why is everyone obliged to take sides and judge? If the state declares the issue none of its business, why would it be the business of private citizens? That certainly smacks of the nanny state to me. Not even God wants people running around pronouncing moral judgements and delivering punishment; that right is his alone. Judge not lest ye be judged, vengence is mine saith the lord. Keep your nose out of consenting adults' bedrooms, saith I.
But no Jonah would be complete without the barnacles sticking to his whale. Jonah quotes a commentor:
First, marriage involves a public ceremony (with a state required license) with a public vow to forsake all others. A married man visiting a prostitute violates that public vow, and so the matter cannot be said to be private. Whether it should be criminal is another matter.
Quick, call the cops. Someone's getting divorced and refusing to forsake all others!
7 comments:
"But once the deception has been exposed, forcing everyone to take sides, everyone must in fact take sides. One can be humane or sympathetic, but they should also judge."
Sounds like, I don't know, FASCISM!
You're blogrolled over at Donkey Punch, by the way.
Quite a dubious achievement...
"But once the deception has been exposed, forcing everyone to take sides, everyone must in fact take sides. One can be humane or sympathetic, but they should also judge."
Sounds like, I don't know, FASCISM!
You're blogrolled over at Donkey Punch, by the way.
Quite a dubious achievement...
Thanks, t4toby.
This is some classic Jonah. The opening paragraph is surprisingly well-written and cogent, then surprise, that was a quote. From an Obama speech. Which Jonah is critical of because Mr. Obama didn't wave the flag wildly and didn't periodically shout "USA! USA!"
I suppose Jonah is defining patriotism as the love of what is best about your country, although with Jonah definitions mean what he wants them to mean. And since liberals hate America, they can't call for patriotism, only unity, a poor substitute.
All this is senseless, but does have the benefit of filling up column space.
Your comment that Obama is calling for unity not patriotism sums up brilliantly what is vaguely unsettling about the beautiful speeches.
Post a Comment