I went over three modern sayings in a previous post that are popular to say, but just don’t make any sense. After writing it, a few more have come to mind.
1) “What someone does in his/her personal life doesn’t affect me.”
To a certain extent, such libertine sentiment is true. What type of food a person chooses to eat doesn’t affect me. What kind of drapes a person puts up in his home doesn’t affect me. But often times so-called private actions can lead to public consequences, which does affect me.
This whole privacy matter generally deals with privacy in the bedroom. For instance, how many liberal protestors who advocate homosexual rights based on “My personal life isn’t the government’s business,” but quickly turn around and want to place limits on how big my “carbon footprint” is, or dictate if I can smoke or not, or even dictate how much electricity I can use? There’s a double-standard – they’re willing to let the government intervene on those issues, but not on sexual issues.
Regardless, what goes on in the bedroom can affect me by affecting society. What we do is often reflected upon our children. As I pointed out in a previous post, sexual immorality tends to go hand-in-hand with other forms of immorality. Thus, if one is engaging in sexually immoral acts in the bedroom, then one is more apt to perform immoral acts in public.
The connection to public corruption, however, is almost irrelevant. Though it may not be the government’s business what goes on in the bedroom or in a person’s personal life, as a human being I have an obligation to point out immorality when I see it. I have an obligation to point out what is wrong (in a loving way) in the way someone is acting. By being human, a person’s personal life is my business.
2) “As long as it doesn’t hurt someone, who cares?”
This is generally the follow-up response from the above modern saying. Again, there is some truth to it. If a person’s immoral actions don’t affect me, in some instances it is wise to stay out of it. If two people are arguing and it’s not my quarrel, sometimes it is best just to avoid it.
However, those are the exceptions and not the rule. When immorality is involved, someone is always getting hurt. Whether it be a direct victim, the family and friends of the perpetrator, or the perpetrator himself, someone is going to be harmed by immorality.
In the case of drug use, watching their loved one drown away in drug use could hurt the family and friends. The person using drugs is likewise hurt by his own choices. Finally, society is harmed because it takes away a potentially productive member of society and could even encourage this person to engage in theft and robbery in order to sustain the addition.
The fact is, all immorality hurts somebody. Even in the case of consensual relations between adults of the same gender – by violating the law of nature they hurt themselves in some way, or at least hurt society by degrading sex into something that is purely for pleasure and nothing else (the same goes for those who engage in promiscuity).
So when immorality presents itself in someone’s life, even if it appears to be private, it is hurting someone, even if that “someone” is the person being immoral. If you love someone, you won’t let that person hurt himself. Only a misguided understanding of love would allow such a thing.
3) “You need to tolerate those different than you.”
If by “tolerate” we mean “put up with,” then yes, there are certain people that we simply have to put up with. We need to put up with those of different economic persuasions. We need to put up with certain beliefs. But none of this means we have to ‘accept’ anything. For instance, from a Facebook group page discussing homosexuality, we read:
Isn’t America supposed to be home of the brave and land of the free? Free means accepting others, whether [they are] bi or gay.
So I have to accept those who are different than me? Would this same person accept a Nazi who was hell-bent on killing Jews? Should we ‘accept’ the Ku Klux Klan? Or how about this; why doesn’t the person accept my belief that homosexuality is immoral? Why must I disregard my belief and accept this person’s belief?
And that’s the inherent problem with tolerance. We simply can’t accept certain individuals into society. I don’t accept pedophiles and neither do most other people. I don’t accept murderers and neither do most other people.
Likewise, I can tolerate a belief (such as Islam) without having to accept it. I can engage that belief in debate, I can show it to be wrong, I can explain why I don’t accept it, but I can allow it to exist in the public realm. None of this means I have to accept it.
Can you think of some more modern sayings?