Those of you who know me or read this blog probably know that I think there’s a serious problem with our 21st-century culture. I’m not an expert nor am I a prophet or a preacher. I just tend to agree with a lot of what I hear and read concerning this problem, and go about my way trying to survive, make a living somehow, and not add to it.
Anyway, another thought struck me while reading Robert O’Donnell’s short little book on the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. Rather than paraphrase, I think it best if I just plunk the best paragraph from the book right here. It says everything I want to say better and most succinctly:
In today’s permissive society, many people object to the terms “unnatural” and “abnormal” to describe any kind of human behavior. The simplest way to eliminate these terms from the vocabulary of ethics is to deny the existence of the natural law. If homosexual behavior is considered to be normal when practiced among consenting adults, or if it is considered to be normal simply because it is practiced by two percent of the population, than no further criteria remain by which we can determine whether this type of behavior is in harmony with or in violation of human nature. This kind of thinking denies the vertical dimension of ethics which is the basis for the existence of the natural law.
(emphasis mine)
Agree with it? If not, where does he go wrong? Remember, he’s writing across the backdrop of Thomistic thought. To me, it explains better than anything else I have read why the push to remove God from the public square. And it’s not just homosexuality – it’s any kind of human behavior that violates the natural law, be it abortion, pedophilia, drug abuse, you name it. If there’s some movement to eradicate the taboo element in any fringe behavior, it’s a safe bet that (a) it found its footing in this initial chipping away of the natural law that’s occurred over the past fifty years or so, and (b) it realizes that if its goal is to be successful (i.e., the normalization of the taboo) it must continue to deny and erode adherence and belief to the natural law.
Yes?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
YES!!! But it goes a step further. The goal is not only the acceptance of the abnormal in the face of Natural Law, but to further the cause requires the derision of normal behavior as defined by Natural Law. Watch an episode of "Will and Grace". How cool to be gay. How square to be "straight".
Uncle
Post a Comment