The times

  I often see a posting from the New York Times concerning a column they must have in their paper. I don't recall the exact title for it, but people write in asking an ethical question. Being a person that enjoys such discussions on morality and ethics I usually respond. More often than not my first reaction will be, you have to ask about that. Many writing in are surely morally bankrupt judging by the question or the explanation of their dilemma. Situations that I wouldn't have to give a second thought to, circumstances where my response would be automatic. I am left wondering about these people. My hope is that they are just "thinking" out loud and not really looking for the answer, but rather venting their frustrations.

 I know I'm just an old country boy, whatever that is supposed to mean, without a college degree, a portfolio of investments and believe in traditional marriage. I also don't proclaim to hate Trump and vilify his every word or action making me one of the MAGA crowd in some people's eyes. I'm not woke, waving brightly colored flags and concerned with who did what first. I'm not even concerned with what happened to my ancestors two hundred years ago, or yours for that matter. I don't believe the world owes me a thing and not everyone has to love me. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. They might hurt you if you say the wrong thing within arm's reach of me though. 

 All of that does find me on the opposite side of the spectrum with the majority of these ethical and moral questions the Times chooses to print. I'm amazed at some of the situations these people find themselves in. Should I have to take care of my elderly parents when they didn't properly plan for their retirement? That is one question I've seen several times. I've seen questions about who should receive what in an estate. The will says my brother should get the house, but I don't feel like that is fair, should I hire a lawyer to break the will. I've been getting five thousand dollars a month from a trust fund but haven't told my wife. Should I tell her. Can I get her excluded from receiving any of that if we get divorced? Deceit, secrets and outright lies seeking justification. That's the way I see that sort of thing. As long as I can get someone else to agree with me, it is alright. It aligns with another blog I composed some time back called, a more convenient faith. It's the removal of saying no.

 Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. That's a rule many seems to ignore these days. In the beginning the lawyers would simply state the law, as written and that was enough, Today the job of the lawyer is to find what it doesn't say. There's no law against that! Then the quest is to make it legal. Morality and ethics are always trumped by the law! If it's legal, it doesn't matter if it is ethical or moral. Thing is, as John Adams pointed out, our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. For the past 247 years there have been those actively engaged in changing that. The majority of them lawyers. 

 Does religion establish ethics? That's a debate that rages on and will continue to rage forever. It certainly appears to me that the absence of religious teachings and doctrines foster unethical and immoral behaviors. Do not confuse the practice of a religion with the beliefs of that religion, they are often at odds. That's the more convenient aspect of faith I wrote about in the past. Consider the fact that just recently the Pope, the leader of the Catholic church, has said it is fine to bless same sex marriages. Now he didn't say the church approves of that, that you could be married in the church by a Priest, but the church would give it its' blessing. A bit of a contradiction in my mind. Tacit approval. Is the church going to bless the abortionist? If not, why not? See the problem there. 

 I do not subscribe to the New York Times and so am restricted in what I can read and how much. I've never tried writing to them with an ethical question. I'm quite certain it wouldn't be published if I did. Whatever the case may be I am left scratching my head. Just what are these people thinking? We are in big trouble people heading down a slippery slope indeed. When morality and ethics is established by politicians we are doomed! ” Without God’s aid, Benjamin Franklin said the Founding Fathers would “succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel." He was talking about the continental congress while drafting the constitution. The United States Code (laws) are divided into 54 categories and the number of pages can't even be counted! Babel indeed! And it comes down to this, that is what it says but what does it mean? Just ask the times.