My Human Conscious

Topic: Right or Wrong

Who is man to judge another man? I do not consider myself to be judge nor a jury. I do have my own opinion because of my personal beliefs. For example, I believe if a man steals a pencil and another man commits murder they both need to pay the price for the crime. Although, one crime is more severe than the other, they are both crimes against society. I consider myself to have traits of both “moral absolutist” and “moral relativist” because situations dictate that right and wrong standards of a person. For instance, if a woman kills because of self defense, I feel that she should not be punished. But if a woman kills because of jealousy or anger, she should be punished. I can not but myself in anyone category because it depends on the situation, the law, and the crime.

The first reason I can not classify myself as moral relativist or absolutist is because the situation plays a major role in determining if a person is a moral absolutist or a moral relativist. I do not feel that a person should make a judge on another without knowing the circumstances of the situation. According to Wikipedia, to say that you are true absolutist means that the situation must be contingent only upon itself and nothing else and to say that you are a true relativist is the position that moral propositions do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. A relativistic position often views moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences. For example, if a mother or father flees from a city or state with their child(ren) and lies about there identity to save there life and there child(ren); an absolutist would declare this to be immoral. Although, the mother or father felt they had no other choice but to take their child(ren) in order to save their child(ren), an absolutist stand point is definitely immoral. A relativist would probably deny that this situation is uniquely important over other situations. Because I feel that this mother or father did what they need to do to protect their child(ren) and the law worked to slow, I could not classify myself as either moral relativist or moral absolutist.

The second reason I can not classify myself as moral relativist or absolutist is because the law determines the outcomes of certain situations. I believe that we must obey man’s law as well as God’s law. God has given men the ability to establish law. Many time members of society corrupt the laws that were established to help us. On August 3rd an article was written in Montgomery, Alabama about whose law should we obey. This question caused controversy surrounding Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore and the Ten Commandments (http://www.geocities.com/fountoftruth/godslaws.html) . Chief Justice Moore did not want to remove the 5300-pound granite monument. Judge Byron Thompson of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta issued an order to remove the monument. Finally, the appeal from Chief Justice Moore was rejected by the United States Supreme Court. Many citizens stated that the monument violated the Fifth Amendment. Many citizens also voiced their opinion and said, “How can a monument stop or prevent anyone from practicing another faith. A monument does not make Christianity the official religion of Alabama.” Although, this was a monument with words, some people were offended. The law made the finally decision. I do not agree with the monument being removed because it cost money to make it, place it in the specific location, and to finally remove it. I do agree that these monuments did not stop anyone from practicing their faith. If that momentum prevented people from practicing their faith, then we should remove billboards with women and men half dressed, remove the use of all Halloween pictures and items, and remove anything that has written upon it. These might prevent a person from practicing their faith.

The finally reason I can not classify myself as moral relativist or absolutist is because of the nature of the crime. If a woman or man kills in self-defense then I do not think they should be sent to jail. There should be consequences to the crime, but not treated as cold-blooded killer. For example, a man beats his wife and/or children; the woman defenses her child and herself and kills the man. The law did not protect her, and then she should be given grace for the crime. On the other hand, a women or man that kills for revenge should be treated as a murder. I think the circumstances should make the decision for the punishment of any crime not a person’s beliefs or strong convections. I do not believe in killing because I do believe the Ten Commandments and the Bible but I will not condemn a person for self-defense.

I will not put my self in the category of moral absolutist or relativists because it one says that I believe that belief and nothing else. I try to stay objective, not pushing my belief upon other people because the truth always prevails.