« Saturday reading -- mixed bag | Main | More clarity »
October 24, 2004
Morality Morons on Parade
:::sigh::: Michele has an excellent post in response to the usual Left refusal to make any moral distinction beyond "America bad/anti-America good." This time is a blatantly gin-soaked raisin-brained piece of moral idiocy from Abu Aardvark. He merely puts up a pic of Abu Ghraib and says:
Vote for this or against it.It really isn't that complicated.
Let's see now AA, how many other moral issues are you unclear on? Do you see any moral distinction between Auschwitz and Hiroshima? Is rape the same as love-making because they both involve sexual intercourse?
Of course, this is not that surprising. The Left and its acolytes are religiously devoted to their own dogma that eschews debate on moral issues. As Dennis Prager writes here
To understand the worldwide ideological battle -- especially the one between America and Western Europe and within America itself -- one must understand the vast differences between leftist and rightist worldviews and between secular and religious (specifically Judeo-Christian) values.One of the most important of these differences is their attitudes toward law. Generally speaking, the Left and the secularists venerate, if not worship, law. They put their faith in law -- both national and international. Law is the supreme good. For most on the Left, "Is it legal?" is usually the question that determines whether an action is right or wrong.
To the Left, legality matters most, while to the Right, legality matters far less than morality. To the Right and to the religious, the law, when it is doing its job, is only a vehicle to morality, never a moral end in itself. Even the Left has to acknowledge this. When Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on a Montgomery, Ala., bus in 1955, she violated the law. Therefore, anyone who thinks she did the right thing is acknowledging that law must be subservient to morality. Why, then, must the overthrowing of Saddam Hussein be subject to international law as determined by Communist China, neo-KGB Russia, amoral France and the thugs who rule Syria?
It does look like AA's moral bankruptcy is being cheered by other's that are just as clueless. No matter that the military was investigating this months before L.A.M.E. ran with it. No matter that military personnel directly involved and responsible are getting their day in court and being held accountable. No, according to the usual idiots, that picture is proof that America is eeeeeevvvviilllll (and the sooner the anointed Leftists take over, the better). Like Michele I could write pages upon pages on this subject and the morality morons still would refuse to "get it." Since they seem so enamored of visuals, I will repost something I created for my old weblog back when Abu Ghraib was first in the news.
Of course, the morality morons refuse to address this. They have little in the way of cajones and are more than half-way to being good dhimmis.
Posted by Darleen at October 24, 2004 09:01 AM
Comments
Great juxtaposition. I'll keep this link handy for the next time a lefty brings up Abu Ghraib (which was directly ordered by GWB, don't you know).
Posted by: insomni at October 24, 2004 10:39 AM
I will never understand the obsession about Abu Ghraib. I know that this was something that our soldiers should not have done and they should be punished for it.
But the cries of what an atrocity this is strike me as hollow. Worse happened at Abu Gharaib under Hussein (which is why it was a mistake to not bulldoze the prison in the 1st place) and noone prattles on about what a disgraceful thing it was for Hussein's henchmen to do whatever things they did to dehumanize detainees then.
Posted by: h0mi at October 24, 2004 12:31 PM
h0mi, I guess you fail to see that Abu Ghraib has had the effect of making U.S. the equal to Saddam-- in the eyes of the people we are supposed to be liberating. And that's all that matters, when you are trying to win hearts and minds. How would you like it if a foreign military libertaed you from a tyrant, only to imprison and abuse your family members?
It's a PR disaster of major proportions. But worse, it's only the tip of the iceberg. Mark my words.
Posted by: Brad at October 25, 2004 08:16 AM
Brad
Go read all of Dennis Prager's article then tell me how the hell you think the abberration of Abu Ghraib makes us "just the same" as Saddam.
Do you think Coventry made Churchill the same as Hitler?
Do you truly and honestly see no moral difference between Auschwitz and Hiroshima??
Posted by: Darleen at October 25, 2004 12:22 PM
Everyone knows that Hussein was bad, and that it was bad when he tortured people. We already know that. And everyone knows that our military is not exactly the same as Hussein's.
But everyone also sees the terrible comparison - Hussein tortured people in Abu Ghraib, and the US military did so too. As well as the sick sexual stuff.
We are NOT supposed to be like Hussein, and we are responsible for what WE do, not what he did, the issue of torture done in OUR name is what we need to address.
The "we weren't exactly as bad as Hussein" defense is shameful. As far as I'm concerned, as a lib, America doesn't do torture. Period. And I'm ashamed that righties aren't more upset that OUR leaders allowed it to happen.
We are not EVER supposed to behave that way, to my view. Evil dictators have always done such things, but America is supposed to be different. Right? Or do you think our standards are defined by whatever the enemy does?
I am ashamed to see that righties are so eager to sink to the level of Hussein. It seems like as long as Hitler or Hussein did something worse, you feel like anything is okay. Despicable.
Posted by: Binacontenda at October 25, 2004 07:15 PM
Everyone knows that Hussein was bad
My, what a forceful, definitive statement!
Ice cream-good! Broccoli-bad! Woohoo, that's the way to describe one of the most prolific, evil murderers of the second half of the 20th century, Scott.
Which American is eager to sink to the level of Saddam? Any "righties" advocating having a military or civilian special unit of card-carrying professional rapists? Any American aggitating that the soldiers on trial (and those already convicted) for this offense should be immediately released and hailed as heros instead?
Get a moral clue here! What happened at Abu Ghraib was ugly, despicable and criminal. People do ugly, despicable and criminal things on a daily basis. I should know.
But we hold our criminals responsible, Saddam honored and feted them. Good god, he directed and participated in the slaughter of individuals to millions. He even had his own sons-in-law murdered.
I'm ashamed that the moral bankruptcy of those that see any correlation between Abu Ghraib and Islamist terror is so pervasive in certain American corners.
Posted by: Darleen at October 26, 2004 06:30 AM
I never even mentioned a moral difference between Auschwitz and Hiroshima. Where do you get this stuff?
Posted by: Brad at October 26, 2004 01:53 PM