New York Times "morality"?


#1

This post didn’t get any traction in another forum, so I am trying it again here under a different title.

Of all places, the *New York Times *at last deals with the problem of moral subjectivism.

“When Death Is on the Docket, the Moral Compass Wavers”

nytimes.com/2006/02/07/h…ml?pagewanted=1

(If you get an Ad, wait about 15 seconds.)

This piece begins by bemoaning the fact that the executioners of capital offenders often have Christian convictions that are at war with what they do. The only way they can get through their job is to morally distance themselves and justify the act of killing a vicious criminal.

Too bad the New York Times couldn’t recognize the moral distancing of the Supreme Court that justified Roe v. Wade, or its own distancing of itself from the execution of the innocent unborn.

Does anyone care to offer other examples of “moral distancing” in the media?



#2

Your link is broken


#3

Updated Link.

People rationalize their behavior so as not to see themselves in opposition to an absolute moral law - sounds like concupiscence if ever I’ve heard it. At least there is an underlying premise here that there are things which members of any society find morally “difficult”…I don’t think the authors (or the NYTimes, for that matter) would acknowledge this, but I think it’s difficult to read the article without that understanding. They also say that the more often you do these morally “difficult” things, the easier it is to do more of them, and the more people adhere to customarily accepted “good” morality, the harder it is to deny the objective moral laws. Sounds like Catholic teaching on venial/mortal sins to me…

Hmm…if there’s an objective moral law…

God Bless,
RyanL


#4

RyanL

Thanks for the updated link.

Yes, at last an admission by the NYT that much of public morality is occupied with turning plain old sin into phoney moral conundrums.

Gilbert


#5

Gilbert:

In reality there is no morality except that one which God and the Church have defined. So if the Church states executions are to carried out only when the offender can no longer be restrained from doing the crime again, then that is the rule and every person has a Moral obligation from abstaining from offending God. The Church states the cases for valid execution would be very rare.

Andy


#6

not to detract from your thread but i refuse to read anything from the NYT!


#7

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.