ethics

Say the Word

Valerie Cullers 22 Comments

Every few weeks, my older brother calls. We talk about several subjects and then the conversation moves to the topic he spends the most time on, the breakdown of civil society. He is a businessman and constantly dealing with people. He cannot believe the way people behave. He decries the corporate greed, the stealing that goes on and the inhumane way people treat each other.

Mind you, I am not talking to any right-wing conservative. He is a far-left leaning liberal who cannot comprehend the moral breakdown in today’s society. It is a rare day if he mentions the word “God” and I have no idea what his religious beliefs are.

I, in turn, answer him pretty much the same way, phone call after phone call. “We, as a society, have lost our moral compass.” In previous centuries, most of western society have based their laws and public morals on the Judeo-Christian ethic, i.e. a belief that some behaviors are wrong. Lying, stealing, adultery, usury and sexual perversion are examples to name a few.

Since our society decided to cast off a belief in God, then of course, His word and the values that are attached to it have lost their significance. Behaviors that were once considered morally wrong have now been accepted. Not only are they accepted, they are now flaunted. Relativism has taken hold, and all behaviors are judged relative to the situation they happen in. Situational ethics is the term used now to describe this phenomenon.

Take stealing for example, it was once considered wrong. Now, corporations can charge astronomical prices for goods and it is an accepted practice. Credit card companies can charge exorbitant interest fees and it is legal. Individuals feel free to walk into stores and steal as much as they can get away with and feel no sense of guilt or shame.

You know we have reached a tipping point when universities have to teach classes in ethics in various disciplines because students have no idea what right or wrong is anymore.

There is a word that is no longer used in today’s society. It is a moral term: sin. Sin is defined as: “an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law. Oxford Languages.

And really, why would we use the term anymore? If as a society we no longer believe that there is a divine law, then there can be no moral transgression against it. However, just because that moral law is no longer accepted as a societal norm, does not mean that it does not exist.

There is a God, a divine moral law, and consequences for breaking that law. Look around you. We are watching those consequences manifest themselves in practically every arena in society. If we want to describe this breakdown in a moral context, we must say the word sin, for it most certainly is the best way to describe what is happening. Sin against self, sin against others and most of all sin against God.

Moral Relativism – Does It Work On A Personal Level?

Valerie Cullers 19 Comments

Moral Relativism holds the view that there are no absolute standards of right and wrong. Moral choices are made at the time dependent on the culture one is in or the situation one is in.

meadow-680607_640 Photo by geralt. Courtesy of Pixabay.

Moral Relativism began to be taught in some of our schools and universities in the 1980’s. Some have come to believe in Moral Relativism and we see that played out in scenarios where people justify and rationalize their actions based on what they want to do at the time. We also see it displayed where people choose to do wrong because they believe that”the ends justify the means.” After all, it’s all relative!

As a belief system Moral Relativism has its flaws. If one follows it on a personal level, it begins to break down rather quickly. A Moral Relativist may believe that it is okay to lie to a teacher about not turning in his homework if it will help him get a better grade. He may steal money from a friend because he believes he needs it more than his friend. He may sleep with a friend’s wife because it feels “right” at the time and he will excuse his actions based on his belief system. 

The Moral Relativist may justify his actions to himself but will react quite differently when these actions are perpetrated against him. Have you ever seen a Moral Relativist react when someone stole his car, slept with his wife, or lied to him about something? He is usually outraged because someone has done him “wrong.” I have not seen one willing to apply his own philosophy to another and accept that the situation is “relative to the other person’s point of view.”

The flaw with Moral Relativism when it is applied on a personal level is that it breaks down when the moral and ethical situations are reversed. No one wants to be lied to, cheated on, or stole from. We all have an innate sense of right and wrong and even if we will go against our own innate beliefs to achieve our ends we will decry another who does us wrong according to our own innate standards.

Whether one wants to believe it or not, we are all born with a conscience. If you watch toddlers, you will see that they know when they have done wrong. There is a look on their face when they lie to you. When they steal a cookie they instinctively hide in order to eat it. They know if they hurt another they have done wrong. Small children feel guilt when they have violated their own conscience.

Whether one wants to believe it or not, there are universal moral laws and they are placed inside of us by our Creator. People of all cultures know that lying, stealing and murder are wrong. No matter what their religious beliefs or ethnicity, there are universal standards of morality written into each human being. Those standards when broken cause us to feel guilt because our conscience tells us we have done wrong.

(for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or excusing them) Romans 2: 14-15

Waiting to Get Fired!

Valerie Cullers 30 Comments

I was working at a legal office when one day several Native Americans came in. They wanted to get their tribe reinstated as they had signed a treaty with the federal government decades before terminating their rights. They needed legislation drafted and prepared to take back to Congress in Washington D.C. They offered to have one of their members work at the office to help with the documentation for the legislation. 

I was asked to work with Bob. He was 6′ 3″ and weighed about 275 pounds. He was an imposing figure as he rode up on his motorcycle with his long black curly hair. He looked like someone you wouldn’t want to meet in a dark alley unless he were on your side. He was very intelligent and had a sense of humor to die for. They assigned us an office to work in.  Bob was supposed to obtain the legal documents, i.e. treaties, etc. and I was supposed to help write the tribal history and insert the legal documentation necessary to support the legislation.

Bob and I worked together for several months. We were about finished with our work and the attorneys were almost ready to take everything back to the Congress in order to introduce the legislation to reinstate the tribe. Everything was going well when some people showed up and wanted to talk to one of the attorneys about the case. 

I was alone in the office when one of the attorneys came in. He looked at me and asked me to draft up several affidavits for the people to sign. He told me what the affidavits were supposed to say. I told him that that wasn’t right and that the affidavits would not be true. He looked at me and said, “Just do it!”angry-man-274175_1280

I was stunned to say the least. I knew the affidavits would not be true and that to draft them up and then witness them would be fraudulent. I thought about it for a few minutes and made a decision. I was not going to draft them up. Period. There were several reasons for this decision: 1. It would be ethically wrong. 2. It would be legally wrong. 3. It would destroy the credibility of the case as the affidavits would obviously be fraudulent. At that point, I was just waiting to get fired. This particular attorney had a bad temper and would brook no insubordination.

So, I did the only thing that made sense at the moment; I got a cup of coffee and started reading a book. After all, no use working on anything else as I was on my last few minutes for the firm. I was well into the first chapter of my book when the lead attorney for the case arrived back at the office. He saw me sitting there idly reading my book and came into the office. “What are you doing?” he asked. I said, “I’m waiting to get fired.” I then explained what had happened. He left the office and talked to the attorney who had given me orders to create the fraudulent affidavits. A while later he came back and said, “You can get back to work,” which I assumed was code for “You’re not fired.”

I took a risk that day. I made a decision that was going to cost me my job. I was pregnant and the firm paid for my health insurance. I lived in a small town and there weren’t a lot of good jobs available. It would be hard to find another one if I had been fired from this job. Because of God’s grace, I did not have to pay a high price for my convictions.

There is always a cost if you follow your convictions. Jesus advised us in Luke 14 to count the cost when making a decision. Sometimes the cost isn’t too high, at other times it is. It is important to take the time to count the cost when making an important decision.

Bottom line for me: having a clear conscience, being able to sleep at night and look myself in the mirror in the morning is worth the cost. What about you? Have you had to pay a high price for your convictions? How did it turn out?