 |
|||||
 |
       |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
LGBT Curriculum Coming to an Elementary School near You (May 2009)
Love Isn’t Enough: 5 Reasons Why Same-Sex Marriage Will Harm Children (October 15, 2007) Dissertation: |
Perceptions
of Evil One Year After 9/11: After nearly one year of reflection, most Americans, including President George W. Bush, still see the events of September 11, 2001 in stark, black-and-white terms. This widely shared viewpoint is that America was unjustifiably attacked that day by evil, worldly forces, or as the president declared, by “evil-doers.” This simple—not simplistic—type of thinking is morally and psychologically healthy and lays the foundation for an appropriate response. Unfortunately, the majority’s perspective is not shared by all. A small percentage of Americans see September 11th differently; some of them recommend a pacifistic response, while others make excuses for the terrorists or offer explanations that blame America for the atrocities perpetrated against her. The question is, what accounts for the perceptual differences between these dissenters and the rest of America? The answer is that these dissenters, rather than viewing evil as the end result of moral choice and free will, as most Americans do, deny that it even exists. Moreover, although their denial appears to be philosophical or political in nature, in actuality it’s psychological in nature. Because underlying an adult’s denial of evil is a psychological longing to exist in a naïve, childlike state—a wish to live as an “adult-innocent.” The wish to live as an adult-innocent manifests itself in a variety of pseudo-political and pseudo-philosophical ways. For instance, adult-innocents generally deny that evil emanates from free will. They prefer instead to believe that evil is caused by external/political forces or internal/psychological ones. Beliefs that fall into these two categories include the theory that evil is a natural reaction to poverty or foreign policy decisions, or that evil itself is merely a psychological illness. These explanations bring comfort because they allow adult-innocents to indulge in the fantasy that evil can be easily eradicated simply by redistributing wealth, changing foreign policy, or curing illness. The bottom-line is that the unpredictable and uncontrollable nature of free-will evil terrifies adult-innocents and thus drives them to deny its existence. Adult-innocents also reject the concept of free-will evil because of the demands its acknowledgement necessitates; if evil is the result of free will, then proactive adult responses are required to contain or destroy it. But these type of responses are untenable to adult-innocents because they yearn to remain passive and dependent. So it follows that adult-innocents favor theories that do not demand their direct action but rather oblige action by others, parental substitutes if you will, embodied in government bureaucrats, politicians, and doctors. Some adult-innocents find the concepts of moral equivalency (i.e., violence is violence) and moral relativism (i.e., one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter) quite enticing because, by definition, these positions don’t require considered judgments. The preclusion of judgment, either upon oneself or upon others, allows the adult-innocent to feel contentedly unencumbered by behavioral, intellectual, and moral restraints. Unfettered by demands, adult-innocents can then live out another of their childlike fantasies—a life full of rights, but free of responsibilities. A few adult-innocents are psychologically seduced by pacifism because it posits that aggression and violence are always wrong. Pacifism’s non-aggressive/non-violent stand is tempting to adult-innocents because it offers a literal means for proclaiming one’s “innocent” status. In-other-words, through pacifism adult-innocents hope to convince the world—and themselves—that they are free of hostility and aggression and thus are pure. Pacifism, however, is psychologically and morally problematic. It’s psychologically unhealthy because pacifism requires the denial of one’s darkside. The denial of the darker aspects of one’s psyche precludes the possibility of appropriately channeling that darkness and thus prevents good psychological health. And pacifism is morally troubling because, through its acquiescence, it becomes an enabler to the perpetrators of evil. Those who deny evil frequently cloak themselves in philosophical and political attire, but when they’re stripped of these sundry disguises, what remains is an adult trying to live as an innocent. Interestingly, many have commented on the topic of innocence in the year since the terrorist attacks. These observers, which include President George W. Bush, have made clear their belief that Americans lost their innocence on September 11, 2001. And while these proclamations are certainly true for the majority of Americans—those who saw evil in life-changing clarity on that Tuesday morning—they are unfortunately not true for others. So, as it turns out, the analysts, the pundits, and even the president didn’t get it exactly right; not all Americans lost their innocence on September 11th. But as for the rest of us, we should thank God that during this crucial turning-point in human history there are vastly more adult-realists than adult-innocents living amongst us, and that one of those realists is the leader of the free world. ###
|
||||
 |
|||||
