From a piece on Huffingtonpost.com this morning there is a new slant on the election. Is God one or two?
“Dobson reserved some of his harshest criticism for Obama’s argument that the religiously motivated must frame debates over issues like abortion not just in their own religion’s terms but in arguments accessible to all people. He said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern by the “lowest common denominator of morality,” labeling it “a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.”
“Am I required in a democracy to conform my efforts in the political arena to his bloody notion of what is right with regard to the lives of tiny babies?” Dobson said. “What he’s trying to say here is unless everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe.”
The question this brings to my mind cuts to the basic idea of morality; is morality two or one? Is morality always my morality as right and your morality as wrong? Or is there one morality that grows out of its opposite? Is morality—is God, for that matter—two or one? Is there a whole larger than its parts?
Dodson builds his morality out of war, out of righteousness, and out of being the defender of morality. But to be a defender, you must have an attack. You can’t defend unless you have an enemy. If one takes the stance of a defender, you must by the nature of your self-definition look for and create an enemy. Without the enemy, you cease to exist. Without the un-chosen, you can’t be the chosen.
So here you have Obama trying to find a way to an inclusive morality with Dodson holding out for an exclusive morality: one is New Testament, the other Old Testament. One is love your opposites; the other is eye for an eye. Is this election now a war between two Bibles? It may be.
Posted under current events
This post was written by ed on June 24, 2008