In looking at the debate, and in looking at how the sides have broken out, I've come to the conclusion that this election is really a referendum on whether America wants to be a nation of moral certainty or moral relativism. You can take your relativism. I'm going to hold onto my belief in right and wrong, thank you very.
2 comments:
My stance as a progressive activist stems from a deeply-held moral conviction that the well-being of people and the environment is more important than money. We may disagree in the beliefs we hold, or we might even agree but disagree on the best way of serving these beliefs, but to claim that the Right has a monopoly on morality is inaccurate and completely undercuts the credibility of any argument you might make.
I'll hold onto my understanding of right and wrong as well: Today's news has Bush claiming that Saddam was "gaming the system" and this justified the war. Justification for the war has to include justification for the deaths of over 1000 American soldiers and countless (10,000?) Iraqis. In what way does "gaming the system" and "intent" to have WMDs justify the deaths of these people? All of the other reasons given publicly by Bush and the Bush adminstration have been shown to be false with more and final certainty this week:
no WMDs,
no connection with 9/11,
no imminent threat,
and no justification on the grounds of "liberating" the Iraqi people.
On this last point, an essay by the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch is all that is needed.
Post a Comment