How many times have you heard this? It's a pretty common retort when talking about moral issues, like abortion or sodomy. (This is especially true on matters relating in any way to sex. See Peter Kreeft's Sexual Reconnection.)
It seems to carry weight, and put people in their place, but it's just about as vacuous an idea as you can get. Before we look at the statement itself, let's look at a few of the violations of that statement that we routinely accept:
- parents telling their children right and wrong
- teachers doing the same
- governments dictating things like the speed you can drive, which side of the road you can drive on, alcohol limits, what you can and cannot own, etc., etc.,
- doctors telling you how you should eat
Pretty much anyone in an authority position, not only tells us how to behave, but if they didn't they would be negligent. It would be harmful for them not to force their morals, their set of behavioral rules on their respective subjects. Along this same line, if you saw someone beating a child, abusing the elderly, or taking advantage of a friend's financial ignorance (stealing), wouldn't you (had you the means) be expected to step up and stop the injustice, i.e. force your morals on the aggressor?
But let's take a look at that what that statement is saying. You can't, or shouldn't force your morality on others. But that itself is a behavioral ought, a moral rule. Whoever says it, is trying to foist their moral norm -that telling others what to do is wrong- on you. It violates the same principle it is purportedly trying to protect.
The long and short of all of this is, the question shouldn't be about whether or not a certain set of morals should be forced on others. The question is which morals should be setup as the norm.
No comments:
Post a Comment