One-eyed "values," left and right

When challenged on "values," progressives inevitably rejoinder that "moral values" also include peace, social justice, care for the poor and for the environment.  In this morning's Fort Myers News-Press, that argument is eloquently -- and typically -- expressed by a local rabbi:

     Rabbi Bruce Diamond celebrated the 50th anniversary of Temple Beth El in Fort Myers Saturday by discussing how biblical values relate to the economy, to war and to issues beyond abortion and gay rights.

     "There is kind of a sexual obsession that masquerades as morality," Diamond said.  "Morality covers a whole range of human activities.  We need to wake up out of this puritanical stupor and look at the real challenges of this nation."

     Values must also be part of decision making on poverty and homelessness in America, war and health care, Diamond said.

     "Those of us who are Bible believers take that very seriously.  Jesus was a healer," the rabbi said.  "What do you think he would say about health care?"

Mostly true -- but . . .

The proponents of progressive morality -- just like the proponents of conservative morality -- are very good at pointing out the other guy's blind spot.  If only progressives would insist that "values" include all of the above in addition to high standards of sexual and familial conduct.  But that isn't really what they're saying -- as witness the rabbi's scornful dismissal of the latter concerns.  Progressives are saying that peace, economic justice, compassion and environmental protection should be our values instead of, or at least way ahead of, sexual morality.  Conservatives are saying the opposite:  that "family values" are exclusively about traditional sexual conduct (not at all about the "value" of a job, a home, an education, health security) and that a "culture of life" applies mostly to the unborn products of such conduct. 

Bring up the notion of any restraints on sex, and liberals simply evade the issue, change the subject.  Bring up Jesus' radical teachings on wealth, poverty, and violence, and conservatives change the subject.  That's why we can't have a conversation, much less a dialogue, on "values."

To get Biblical about it, when it comes to deadly sins, the Left gives a free pass to Lust; the Right gives a free pass to Greed.  Liberals need to confront the necessity for a sexual morality, not of straights vs. gays, but of commitment vs. exploitation, meaning vs. addiction, creation vs. consumption.  Conservatives need to confront Jesus' warnings about the dicey relationship between wealth and heaven and our crucial responsibility for "the least of you." 

Then we can talk.

- amba

   

Comments

[kxar]

I ran across your site surfing morality blogs.
Morality isn't "left" or "right" It's foundation is the human condition. There is a common and humanly universal foundation for right and wrong. Its a long article but if you google ezsgblog+com/kxar you might find a new understanding of it.

kxar

[sleipner]

I realize this is a rather old post, but I just ran across your site recently.

I agree with your statement about left being a free pass to Lust, the right a free pass to Greed.

However, Lust is a personal behavior that affects only the people involved. Not only that, but it is (or at least used to be) a constitutionally protected individual freedom. The only claim anyone can make against most of the related issues covered by the Left is religious - and that is NOT supposed to be mandated by the government.

Greed affects everyone - one person's greed can destroy hundreds if not thousands of lives, given enough power to back up that greed. Just look at what's happened since Bush took office.

So I guess given the choice between lust & greed being given free reign, I'll go with lust any day. Of course I'm one of those left wingnuts these blogs mention so frequently ;)

[amba]

Lefties always underestimate the damage unchecked lust does (the way righties tend to think "greed is good"). In fact, it does affect other people -- from those hurt by infidelity and uncommitment, to children conceived by and born to the unready and uncommitted, to kids pushed into sexuality while they're still kids, to some of the casualties of a 50+% divorce rate (4 of my 5 siblings have been divorced; 2 already had children; but I can't say any of the divorces were attributable to rampant lust -- rather to bad marital choices). It's not just private behavior, it's a whole cultural atmosphere that encourages careless and uncaring behavior. It's not something that can be legislated, though. And why should we have to choose between them being given free rein? Or choose between free rein and rigid puritanism or socialism? Why not moderation in both?

[sleipner]

I agree that things like divorce and infidelity can cause big problems in child development. That is one area in which I have a few more concerns, as there is a third party affected by the decisions being made.

However, I have a real problem with people trying to "enforce" relationships...either via having a kid to try to keep the relationship together, by doing that "compact marriage" I think it's called that makes it tougher to divorce (I can just see a domineering control freak forcing their spouse to do that), or by any other means. In my opinion, if there's physical or verbal abuse going on, kids are better off with a single parent than being subjected to that.

In fact, I think the whole attempt to force the "traditional" view of marriage is actually a detriment, because there are lots of different kinds of people out there, who relate in numerous different ways. Trying to fit everyone through the same square hole means you have to slice off the bits that don't fit, which rarely makes anyone happy.

I personally think the reason the divorce rate is high is because 50 years ago, the abused spouse had no other option but to hunker down and take it. Granted, only a portion of divorces are due to abuse, but if one is unhappy in a relationship, forcing yourself to endure it is a great recipe for depression. I do think perhaps people give up too soon in many cases, in our "easy way out" society, but that is their choice.

Regarding children being "pushed into sexuality" I think that early education is vital in normal sexual development. Ignorance and "abstinence only" is most certainly NOT a way to combat teen pregnancies or STD proliferation, the studies I've heard about it basically say it increases both.

One of the reasons America is so prudish and screwed up about sexual matters is because of the hysteria about kids seeing anything deemed "inappropriate." If we did not overly mysticize the human body and sexuality the psychologists of our country would have far less work than they do now. Europe is far more open about such matters, and from what I can tell, the Lord God Almighty hasn't smitten them yet, and their societies haven't crumbled into decadent ruins.

Thirty percent of all teen suicides are teenagers who are having gender identity issues. That means it these teenagers are 5 to 10 times as likely to commit suicide. And this is of course due to the lack of education about homosexuality, the lack of resources for teens to find (anonymous) help and advice, the lack of enforcement against bullying homosexuals in schools, and the bigoted beliefs of their religious right parents, and in some cases, teachers.

One area I tend to be a bit draconian is that I think we should research a safer and more effective method of birth control...then apply it UNIVERSALLY at puberty. No one should ever have a child unless they have consciously made the decision to do so.

That way...no more unwanted babies, no more crack babies, no more overpopulation.

Of course the catholics and mormons would object...

[amba]

It's called "covenant marriage." In principle, at least , it's supposed to be consensual.

By "pushing kids into sexuality," I meant fashion and music and TV and advertising, not sex education. Europeans are actually less obsessed with sex, more matter-of-fact about it, than we are, and as far as I can tell they do not push kids into it the way we do. Twelve-year-old girls do not dress like Britney Spears. I've met teen-age girls of 14 and 15 over there who had no interest in having a boyfriend. They are generally close to their parents instead of in full revolt against them. They begin to have relationships in their late teens, but usually continue to live with their parents until they get married, and to live near them afterwards.

[Morgaine Swann]

There's a big difference in the topics of greed and sexuality. Greed causes poverty, exploitation of people and resources, cruelty and war - the most profitable enterprise in our culture.

Sexuality is a very personal decision, and the definition of what I consider moral and what you consider moral may differ very greatly when it comes to sex, while we'd probably both come up with a fairly universal view of greed.

I particularly liked this line in your post:"commitment vs. exploitation, meaning vs. addiction, creation vs. consumption. " That's a much more functional way to frame sexual morality than I've heard in a while. I do, however, agree with the Rabbi you quoted that we are seeing a great deal of political conflict created by sexual obsession. Public policy doesn't need to address our private decisions. Government is intended to maintain order so that we can all live freely. Greed is relevant to that end, but lust is not.

[amba]

I do agree that government should not and cannot regulate lust (it's definitely out of its element as well as out of line in the bedroom!), but I do think that out-of-control lust, like out-of-control greed, hurts people beyond just the one choosing to act a certain way. We think of sex and drugs as "private" decisions, but think how addiction (sex addiction included) devastates all the people who love the addict . . .

[Icepick]

Conservatives need to confront Jesus' warnings about the dicey relationship between wealth and heaven and our crucial responsibility for "the least of you."

We conservatives who are NOT followers of The Book don't have that problem. For us heathen athiest conservatives, IT'S ALL ABOUT THE GREED, BABY!!!!