The Intolerance of Truth

Over the past few years I have been stunned at the increasing unwillingness of our leaders and media to make black-and-white statements regarding their stances on certain issues.

Whatever the subject may be - whether it's Terry Schiavo and the decision to "pull-the-plug", capital punishment, abortion, gay-marriage or any other hot-button social issue - it is now extremely rare to hear anyone give an honest statement regarding their beliefs.

Political correctness has now completely replaced the search for truth and honesty. Yes, that is a general and broad reaching statement, but take it as that and see if it fits. I trust you will find it to be true.

President Obama gave the perfect example of what I am talking about last year at the debate at Saddleback Church. When asked about his thoughts on abortion he answered, "...That's above my pay grade."

That's all-time cop-out. This is an issue that nearly EVERY American has strong feelings about - and nearly EVERY American will answer that question truthfully and honestly when asked - but our new President (a Senator at the time) can't discuss his belief and stance on the issue?

This is not meant to pick on President Obama, but rather to show that even the "leader of the free world" has regressed to the point of absurd political correctness.

Honestly, what would have happened if President Obama had responded with a very articulate, well-thought out and sensitive answer to that question? There are absolutely logical and rational reasons to support abortion. Would he have been branded intolerant? Certainly not. Obviously a very large number of people would disagree with him, but to dodge that question in that manner was disingenuous at the very least. President Obama has demonstrated he has uncanny speaking skills, so one must conclude that he chose to dodge the question in the name of political correctness rather than for a lack of a legitimate answer.

This is troubling.

Really the only reason I can come up with is that people are now afraid to be branded as "Intolerant."

When there's a news story about racism, no one has any problem condemning racism. Why? Because the vast majority of people condemn racism so it is 'safe' to do the same.

If you were to voice the opinion that racism is OK, you would most certainly be branded intolerant. Rightly so.

However, the question becomes, is the person intolerant because they don't agree with the vast majority or because all races of people OUGHT to be 'tolerated' (by tolerated I mean afforded the same rights and respect as all human beings)

That seems like an obvious answer... it's the latter.

It is the "OUGHT" that really changes the discussion.

This answer becomes less clear when the question is about capital punishment, assisted suicide, or abortion and the majority is not as clear cut.

What ought we to do?

Is it good to be tolerant of a bad thing? Clearly not.

The reluctance to say something like "I support abortion" can be construed to be the realization that you might be wrong about the worthiness of the tolerance of abortion.

We need truth to guide us and teach us the things which we should tolerate.

Dodging these questions in the name of tolerance and political correctness is tantamount to saying that you aren't firm in your beliefs.


I'll finish by quoting my favorite pianist, Sergey Rachmaninov

"The new kind of music seems to create not from the heart but from the head. Its composers think rather than feel. They have not the capacity to make their works exalt—they meditate, protest, analyze, reason, calculate and brood, but they do not exalt."

We meditate, protest, analyze, reason, calculatea and brood... but we have stopped exalting...


-T


Here are some links...

In praise of Darwin and the spirit of inquiry

Superman don't need no airplane...

All economists agree?


Obama a Novice?