Objective Truth vs Moral Relativism
By: Guy in General on March 19, 2007 - 10:11 am
Chuck Colson, in his own staight-forward way, sums up the flap that the MSM has made over General Peter Pace’s remarks about homsexuality. He makes no bones about drawing a clear, disctinct line between objective truth and moral relativism.
“Our nation’s top military officer, a veteran decorated with no less than forty-eight military awards and a very distinguished career, made a startling revelation [last] week: He has moral conviction… General Peter Pace commented in a wide-ranging interview with the Chicago Tribune, ‘My upbringing is such that I believe that there are certain things, certain types of conduct that are immoral. I believe that military members who sleep with other military members’ wives are immoral in their conduct, and that we should not tolerate that.’ But then Pace went on to tell the Tribune, ‘I believe that homosexual acts between individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.’ Well, stop the presses. Of course, all that the radio, news, and television outlets have focused on since General Pace’s comments are his remarks on homosexuality. Never mind that he puts immorality of all kinds on equal footing… We are basically saying that if you are the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you are not allowed to express your moral or religious views—especially on matters of sexual preference and behavior. This is another sign that we live in an age that no longer believes in objective truth or a moral order. Moral relativism is the rule, and personal preference trumps all. And government is there to ensure that no one place any restraint on the pursuit of our own desires.” —Chuck Colson
Trackback URL for this post:
http://geezervilleusa.com/2007/03/19/objective-truth-vs-moral-relativism/trackback/
When he compares homo-sexuality to other sins like adultery, he only makes the left angrier. They too believe unfaithfulness to be immoral. But they do not believe practicing homosexuality is a sin, but that they were born that way, like we were born without that proclivity.
It is a conflict unavoidable….one a believer in God’s order, the other in the disorder of Darwin.
March 20, 2007 - 9:55 amAnother thing to consider is that even if the General has a moral conviction, should he express it on such blatant terms? I belive he has every right and the media is making too big a deal about this. Some believe homosexuality is wrong; some believe it is okay. I don’t see what the big deal is.
March 20, 2007 - 5:10 pmMany people refuse to acknowledge the sin that is inherent in homosexuality. They live in a world filled with denial of the ultimate truths in life.
It says in Romans 2:14,15 ” for when Gentiles, who do not have the law (the ten commandments) by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)”
Some day God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ
March 25, 2007 - 8:58 pm