Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil (Isaiah 5:20).Last week a woman on Facebook had the audacity to refer to President Barack Obama as “evil.” A vocal supporter of the President and his agenda took severe umbrage. (I know…hard to believe, right? An easily offended liberal?) Anyway, our sensitive social progressive wrote the ensuing rebuke.
Calling someone evil that you don't even know is harsh...No president is evil or has been. Evil are people who rape and kill children and women and so forth. You don't like policy then do something about - take a stand and talk to the leaders. Do something than bitch [sic]. Volunteer and help folks in need - so much more to do than calling a person evil. Folks killing off others - thus genocide is evil…Get clarity on true evil and let's work for a better future than all this hate. What Hitler and his followers did to the Jews and gays was evil beyond evil. Stop the hate. I'm sick of it.Please notice: Those who resent and oppose biblical morality are downright puritanical when it comes to their own skewed sense of right and wrong. It seems that the moral outrage of the ethically challenged knows no bounds. What follows is my response to the above quote.
What you pejoratively term "bitching" is covered under the freedom of speech. The legal right to call a sitting President "evil" should be cherished by all. Sadly, the U.S. government, with our sheepish compliance if not tacit approval, has been systematically curtailing our liberties for much of our nation's history.
I would also add, sir, that most folks can walk and chew gum at the same time. Just because a person decries an elected official as "evil" doesn't mean that that person is inactive or does nothing to pursue what they perceive to be the greater good.
You allege: "No president is evil or has been."
You then offer: "Evil are people who rape and kill children and women and so forth....Folks killing off others... Get clarity on true evil..."
When you claim that no President has been or is evil, and then you list what you consider to be evil actions; it makes me wonder: Have you never read an American history book? Our government, as a matter of policy, has engaged in many such activities. (You have the right to speak freely but you do not have the right to be correct while so doing.)
Furthermore, when you speak of "true evil" you are invoking moral categories. Morality is predicated upon the character of God. God defines what is moral--not man--and then He imposes His morality upon man both externally [God's Law written upon tables of stone] and internally [God's Law written upon tables of the heart--conscience].
Thus, morality is absolute and unchanging. Morality is not a matter of subjective, fickle feelings. And, morality cannot be altered by popular vote. 51% can make something legal, but 51% cannot make something moral. Morality is in no sense democratic and that which is "legal" is often immoral.
You write: "Stop the hate. I'm sick of it."
Stopping hatred goes both ways, friend. Some of the most hateful, intolerant people in all the world are on the left, and when someone like me disagrees with their position they hurl insults such as "homophobe, bigot, extremist," or, quite popular nowadays, "racist."
You see, anyone who dares to disagree with the left's agenda is automatically maligned and marginalized in effort to stifle debate, to "shut them up." So, yes, we should "stop the hate." I think we're all "sick of it."
It should be abundantly clear from this brief exchange that there is no escaping the subject of morality. Man is a responsible moral agent and he cannot think or live non-morally. Absolute amorality is unthinkable and unlivable. And so it’s not that those who reject godliness want no morality. Far from it. What they want and shrilly demand is godless “morality.” That is, they want to define what is “good” and what is “evil” on their own terms and without any reference to the Moral Law Giver.
The U.S. has lost its Christian moral consensus. So the question is this: In post-Christian America, whose morality will be legally imposed upon whom?