On Modern Liberal Moral Relativism

Here we have a glimpse of the liberal mind, and how putty like it can be:

So, what this about Luis Posada Carriles? He blows up an airliner and we release him on bail? Ah...... Ain't doing something like that terrorism? ah, but he's OUR terrorist!

I dashed off a suitable reply:

Yeah, stuff like that doesn't fit well with your moral relativism...

In confusion the lib responds:

Ah, clearly ya gotta brush up on what relativism means...

So I must take that bait!

Se, you base your action on opinion, opinion derived from a questionable guidance structure. It's inherent in modern liberalism to just move around loosly defining whats is good or bad to suit your opinion. That is the epitome of moral relativism. I think it fits just fine.

Well dear reader, am I wrong? But in defense:

The above is BS. I quote the first sentence from Wikepedia:

In philosophy, moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences.

As a first cut, the above is ok by me. There are no moral or ethical universals; moral truth is culturally based. Yup. How that relates to liberalism I'm not quite sure. For example, there are quite a few Catholic liberals, which to me sounds like a contradiction in terms, but not to them......strange world.

Well, don't look a gift horse in the mouth! I was actually aghast at this, how more myopic can liberalism become? Even to deny the obvious, while explaining the said obviousness, in concurrent statements! So we soldier on:

You claim "BS" on moral relativism, yet validate my observation! Pure schizophrenia! Your liberal religion is your moral standard! And its based on opinions and feelings! Completely relative! The gage of 'good' and 'bad' simply moves around based upon your subcultures political desires! It's collective insanity.

How about I use simple terms from your chosen definition? Is it not the preference of your subcult to destroy the Bush administration? Is that not the overarching goal of those thrown together by the political loss in January 2001? Is it not circumstance which binds you together with likeminded socialists, with whom your 'moral' boundaries fluctuate to justify political success? There are a multitude of clear instances substantiating such chaotic behavior within the modern liberal religion.

What is most interesting to me is the statement that you seem to agree with concerning objective moral truths. Is this correct? You can not accept objective truth, simply because it doesn't conform to your subcult's circumstance? That is fascinating. How telling that the left seems to exist for the purpose of establishing its own self serving moral behavior. It is similar to a virus in that regard I guess.

Now, for the last point, nutter modern liberals do not like partial religious converts. "How can a Catholic be a liberal!" Yes, it seems absurd, that anyone who believes in God could be a liberal, doesn't it? But, consider that there are a plethora of 'cultural' Catholics, or any other religious label you prefer. They like the community, the ritual, the society of religion. But have not considered seriously the constitution of their personal philosophy and beliefs. They are easy pickings for the emotionally driven modern liberal subcult. I would suppose if asked to defend their beliefs, it would be easier for them to regurgitate modern liberal rhetoric than profess a experience of God.

To expand on the above, for just a moment, we should consider the emotional 'religious' experience versus spiritual reality. It is easy to supplant good feelings with actual faith. Giving money feels good, listening to a concert on Sunday morning feels good, many religious activities feel good, yet one can exist in perpetuity in those good feelings without ever exercising faith or even believing in God. And as a counter, one can 'care' about specific issues or situations to the point of the suspension of cognition. This is the creation of belief, the faith of the foolish, which is the core dynamic of modern liberalism. Emotional response can supplant the exercise of actual spirituality, and can become a religion unto itself. So the hapless hereditary Catholic mentioned above is doubly susceptible to becoming a liberal, its no wonder there are many such.