Situational Ethics and Politics

https://eloquentgushing.com/36i1o1mpqd An editorial writer named Ruben Navarrette, Jr, recently wrote an article that I found to be most enlightening. Ruben is a Mexican-American editorial writer who generally tends conservative. He followed the Duck Dynasty controversy and then watched the controversy over the Romney adoption jokes on MSNBC. It was watching those two back to back that drove him to write this editorial. He brings up a couple of points that most interested me:

And it prompts me to kick off the new year with a confession: I’m bored with both the right and the left. In politics, everyone lies. No one tells the truth. They all push their own agendas. Everything is divided into these camps of blue and red, liberals and conservatives.

https://inteligencialimite.org/2024/08/07/3f5pebj2yu The order of the day is situational ethics. Your guy says something wrong, and you defend him because he’s your guy. Next week, your opponent says the same exact thing, and you excoriate him because, well, he’s your opponent. Where is the consistency?

It is funny that he would use the words, “situational ethics.” When I first started in seminary, one of the major topics of discussion was Joseph Fletcher and his book Situational Ethics. The problem with situational ethics is that, originally, it proposed that one does the most loving thing in any situation, even if it violates a Scriptural precept. Now Fletcher was not absolutely wrong (yes, that is a pun). Most Christians throughout the centuries have seen ethics as a system of priorities rather than a system of absolutes. What do I mean by that?

https://homeupgradespecialist.com/xxld80u8a Here is one example. Normally, deliberately putting yourself in a situation that causes your death is considered wrong. After all, that is one of the possible definitions of suicide. The exception to the rule is if you are saving someone else’s life, or you are placing yourself in the line of danger as a law enforcement officer, a soldier, or as Father Maximilian Kolbe (now Saint Kolbe) did in World War II when he volunteered to take someone else’s place who was slated to be executed. The most famous expression of ethics as a system of priority is found in a science fiction writer (now deceased) called Isaac Asimov. His three laws of robotics are a perfect example of ethics seen as a system of priorities:

https://nedediciones.com/uncategorized/anefb0f7q57 A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

https://merangue.com/nu8qm3oin The type of ethics proposed by Fletcher was undefined. What does doing the loving thing mean? In fact, whatever Fletcher may have meant, in practice it meant that people did what made them feel the least uncomfortable. Or, people did whatever most went against the written rules. It did not take long for the system to deteriorate into whatever made the person feel good.

But, Navarrette points out that what has happened today is a perversion of even that rather easy to manipulate system. In the case of today’s political discussion, he is right. The discussion has degenerated into a pure, “the ends justify the means,” ethics. If you watch the talking heads for any length of time, you will realize that it is all talking points designed only to minimize damage to your side and maximize damage to the other. There is little recognition of any type of actual ethical structure. Writers and TV talking heads are found who are most able to put up specious arguments in order to support their point. The various cell phone camera clips that have been leaked from both sides points out how strategies are developed to deliberately misguide the voter.

But, here is what saddens me even more. All too many Christians have fallen into that same type of thinking and acting. It has become more obvious that this is so since Pope Francis was elected and began to speak. No, I do not consider myself innocent in this area. He has called me to account as well, even though I am Orthodox rather than Roman Catholic. But, there are too many Christian organizations who almost function as front men for whatever their political party is saying. Both Democrats and Republicans have stables of “tame” Christians who will back anything they say and refute anything the other side says. Ruben Navarrette, Jr, is correct in point out that this is purely a type of situational ethics.

https://www.psicologialaboral.net/2024/08/07/h820bd8 So, perhaps the purpose of this post is to say to all of us Christians that we need to realize how easy it is for all of us to fall into situational ethics. Pope Francis has spoken strongly against hypocritical clergy. Let us examine ourselves to ensure that we have not fallen into situational ethics, that we are not hypocrites, that we are not taking the easy road. Let us debate with vigor, but let us debate honestly, with logic, and with sound ethics.