Sunday, May 31, 2009
Keep It Real!
No human being is perfect, beside myself, at least that is what I tell myself once in awhile. 
In total sincerity, we all have moments, which we would like to keep hidden inside our closet forever. Knowing this little truth, we could easily assume that dispensing moral advise to and criticism of others should be avoided at all times. At the same time, we are also well aware that moral advise and criticism are necessary part for the well-being of any truly “civilized” society. That is, for any true society to be just and fair there must always be people who truly speak out against evil that threatens the well-being of any civilized society. Does this mean we all have right to be pretentiously self-righteous when we dispense our moral advise and criticism? No, but if we are to take this particular path, then we must also be aware that what goes around comes around. Make sure to hide those pictures, videos, and every inappropriate moments because it will surface again someday. To speak for moral good is stand against evil that attempts to tear communities apart from oneself and one-another. Also, to speak for moral good is to speak in the realm of ideals to live by. That is, when we speak for moral good, we speak in the ideal that good must always practiced and upheld regardless of the cost to oneself. We speak in this manner because some moral goods are ideals which only makes sense to particular social tradition that upheld certain moral goods to be necessary part of communal relationship. For example, no one would disagree that murder is wrong. At the same time, different society classifies murder differently from another. But in this case there is a universal agreement that murder is wrong and unacceptable. Now there are moral goods that is not so universally acceptable as necessary thing to have for the well-being of community. Furthermore, some moral goods change in value depending on the time and place, i.e., what could have been taboo yesterday is no longer today’s taboo. Case in point, divorce is no longer taboo for many in this country and also no longer a moral evil, but merely a misfortune of life. Thus, when speaking against divorce, we should simply state our own personal moral opinion of divorce, then acknowledge that divorce is part of life because human beings are not perfect. Similarly, when speaking against homosexuality, we should simply state our own personal moral opinion against homosexuality, then acknowledge that this moral opinion is rooted in a particular cultural-social-religious tradition, which is only fully understood in the context of that particular tradition. Now this is not to say that no one has the right to disagree or criticize. Quite the contrary, all of us have right to criticize and put our own two pennies worth, i.e., no one has the right to take away the right to speak for or against ambiguous moral opinion. However, our moral stand cannot in itself be immoral, that is, it cannot be dehumanizing.
In total sincerity, we all have moments, which we would like to keep hidden inside our closet forever. Knowing this little truth, we could easily assume that dispensing moral advise to and criticism of others should be avoided at all times. At the same time, we are also well aware that moral advise and criticism are necessary part for the well-being of any truly “civilized” society. That is, for any true society to be just and fair there must always be people who truly speak out against evil that threatens the well-being of any civilized society. Does this mean we all have right to be pretentiously self-righteous when we dispense our moral advise and criticism? No, but if we are to take this particular path, then we must also be aware that what goes around comes around. Make sure to hide those pictures, videos, and every inappropriate moments because it will surface again someday. To speak for moral good is stand against evil that attempts to tear communities apart from oneself and one-another. Also, to speak for moral good is to speak in the realm of ideals to live by. That is, when we speak for moral good, we speak in the ideal that good must always practiced and upheld regardless of the cost to oneself. We speak in this manner because some moral goods are ideals which only makes sense to particular social tradition that upheld certain moral goods to be necessary part of communal relationship. For example, no one would disagree that murder is wrong. At the same time, different society classifies murder differently from another. But in this case there is a universal agreement that murder is wrong and unacceptable. Now there are moral goods that is not so universally acceptable as necessary thing to have for the well-being of community. Furthermore, some moral goods change in value depending on the time and place, i.e., what could have been taboo yesterday is no longer today’s taboo. Case in point, divorce is no longer taboo for many in this country and also no longer a moral evil, but merely a misfortune of life. Thus, when speaking against divorce, we should simply state our own personal moral opinion of divorce, then acknowledge that divorce is part of life because human beings are not perfect. Similarly, when speaking against homosexuality, we should simply state our own personal moral opinion against homosexuality, then acknowledge that this moral opinion is rooted in a particular cultural-social-religious tradition, which is only fully understood in the context of that particular tradition. Now this is not to say that no one has the right to disagree or criticize. Quite the contrary, all of us have right to criticize and put our own two pennies worth, i.e., no one has the right to take away the right to speak for or against ambiguous moral opinion. However, our moral stand cannot in itself be immoral, that is, it cannot be dehumanizing.Friday, May 29, 2009
ELCA, the Gringo Church...and proud of it!!!
I saw this trend report from a blogger that I occassionally read from and the report blew my mind away. Honestly, the largest ELCA church in this country truly reflect the general makeup of the second largest mainline church in this country. Regardless of it, one must admit that such trend had to be hard to maintain. That is a hard achievement. They should win an award like: “We have been Gringo for the past 7 year and proud of it." Or, "We can't help we are in love with Grinco." Or, "Grinco Fever!"
“Ye without sin cast the first stone”?
Of late, we have been hearing lots of moral advice from all side of the spectrum, both from the liberal and conservative camps. There is nothing wrong about “preaching” morality. It is important that we, as a society, teach our children the value of being a morally conscientious human being. But only teaching our children will not do for adults also need to be taught and reminded again and again of the importance and value in living a virtuous life. At times, adults need more encouragements to be virtuous. They need daily reminders that living a conscientious moral life is to live for the well-being of others regardless of the cost to oneself. This means that at times we must confront evil. Hence, the act of speaking out against immorality is neither wrong nor unwelcome. But, before we put our two pennies worthy, it would be wise to reflect on our own past, present and future. It is easy to forget our own propensity toward evil thoughts and actions. We all have the potential both for evil and good. It is a constant reality that manifest itself out in our decisions, which each of us make daily, regardless of whether those decisions were made in full cognizance or not. True that most of us cannot imagine the unfathomable evil, e.g., the Holocaust, the Armenian Genocide, the Rwanda Genocide, Pol Pot, the Japanese Imperial Armies rape, as part of us all. We cannot fathom orchestrating or assisting the demise of human beings just because of their ethnical background. But, at the same time, we must be aware of the simple fact that we are not people of a particular period and place. Honestly, are we real to believe that if we were born white and living around the early part of the 1900s that we would protest and speak against lynching? Most likely not, and if we do believe that we would have protested and marched against the lynching of black bodies, then we are not being truly honest with ourselves. We are all product of our particular time and place. Thus, it is easier to speak out against lynching because many of us find such practice horrifying. It is always easy to make a stand against evil when we are aware that most believe a particular activity is evil. Most of us are against racism and believe racism is evil because society in large have judge against the practice of systematic racism. But, can we be sincerely honest with ourselves so as to say that we could and would fight for interracial marriage during the 1920s? Could we have stand and fight against the mob as they prepare to lynch a black person? Could we have stand and fight against the genocide of Native Americans during the 19th century? It is easier to speak and protest against immorality and evil when we are not pioneers in our protest and fight against immorality and evil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)