Reason 334: Because There’s No Morality In The Moral Relativism The Institution Teaches

There was a man who had earlier seen no reason for his legs and so had them amputated.  At a later point, the man began to lament that he was extremely limited in his mobility and he just couldn’t figure out exactly why. That’s kind of how this article reads:

Students’ Broken Moral Compasses

What this writer can’t seem to figure out is that it’s not the compass that is broken, but rather it’s true north that’s broken. In a world in which one day north is one direction and the next it’s  some other direction, a compass is of no use. The author assumes that the god/state is sufficient for determining true north. He can’t see that what the state once outlawed, it now encourages.  That’s because the absolute north required for a reliable moral compass was amputated years ago with the help of the very institution in which  he laments that it’s now found to be absent.

The established religion of Secular Humanism in the state school is simply unable to teach absolutes. While the state has no problem teaching self-contradicting ethics, it will never contradict it’s own ethic that there are no absolute ethics. It follows then that ethics is thrown into the same box as other impossible-to-define, “ethical” causes, such as equality, or social justice and so on. In this environment ethics just winds up being the square peg of feelings being hammered into the round hole of absolutes.

An example from the article:

As my students seemed to crave more meaningful discussions and instruction relating to character, morality, and ethics, it struck me how invisible these issues have become in many schools. By omission, are U.S. schools teaching their students that character, morality, and ethics aren’t important in becoming productive, successful citizens?

The first word written in neon is “meaningful”. Meaningful you say? How can that be? The institution teaches that each person is the product of chance, that they are only arranged molecules in a chemical sack that will one day cease to be, and in between the survival of the womb and the grave the accumulation of material wealth is the means of measuring justice.  Because make no mistake, when the institution teaches justice, it’s teaching material redistribution.

It is quite amazing that someone can come so close to the problem and not see the real problem. He correctly laments Common Core. He understands that there is a problem with ethics. But he can’t quite walk across the room to see the answer because his moral legs were amputated years ago.

But it doesn’t have to be this way for your child. Meaning is important, and there is meaning in life beyond life itself. And in the same well from which we draw up meaning, we also draw up morals, which, as it turns out, are absolute after all.

 

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Moral Relativism, Worldview

One response to “Reason 334: Because There’s No Morality In The Moral Relativism The Institution Teaches

  1. Amen. True North is God. They have taken God out of the public schools. That has been the biggest mistake ever! Do you know that prayer is the single most helpful tool in my toolbelt for teaching a difficult math concept and for teaching any subject and concept? When a public school teacher has an issue with a child understanding a math concept, can she say, “let’s pray for help!”

    No.

    See, that is the problem.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s