The Illogicality of the New Morality

Two recent news articles demonstrate what I refer to as The Illogicality of the New Morality.  First, a few words on new morality.

New morality suggests the former presence of old morality, or simply, morality.  Without getting lost in why and when, our nation systematically severed its cultural moorings, which were based on the Bible’s morality.  Concepts such as moral absolutes – definite right and wrong – grew outdated.

They were replaced quickly by new morality, which favors situational ethics and morality defined by individuals.  New morality gave rise to phrases such as: “This feels right to me.”; “If it feels good, do it.”  New morality cast out centuries of time-honored, trustworthy traditions that worked.  Into the vacuum rushed an “anything goes” mentality.

What new morality fails to account for, however, is that without regard to how fresh and relevant its claims may appear, it is flat-out illogical.  Consider two recent news stories.

In the first, a December 6th article from the National Journal, Senator James Inhofe, R-Okla., stated that he will not resume his 30-year tradition of riding his horse in Tulsa’s annual Christmas parade, because the officials changed its name from the Christmas Parade of Lights to the Holiday Parade of Lights.  “Christmas meant the birth of Jesus Christ,” he said. “That’s what I’m celebrating.  That’s what my 20 kids and grand kids are celebrating.”

Senator Inhofe is right!  I realize we Americans live in a melting pot comprised of people from a plethora of ethnic and religious backgrounds.  How, I ask, however, does this change the fact that Christmas celebrates Jesus Christ’s birthday?  Americans are free to disbelieve that Jesus is God’s Son.  They are free to reject Jesus’ claims of exclusivity.  They don’t have to worship Him at Christian churches.  These freedoms do not, however, erase the fact that a man named Jesus was born two thousand years ago in a hamlet named Bethlehem.  They don’t remove the fact that Jesus influenced Western civilization to such a degree that His followers celebrate His birth two millennia later.

No one forces every American to celebrate Christmas.  No law in our land requires mandatory presence at Christmas parades.  These are voluntary activities which every citizen can freely take part in or not.  Why, then, does the new morality scream so loudly that Christmas celebrations infringe upon people’s rights?  Why are countless cities changing the name of their annual Christmas parades, choosing instead names such as Holiday Parade?  Why are public schools renaming Christmas break to inane holidays such as Winter Break?

There are no answers to my questions of why, because these actions are all illogical; hence, the Illogicality of the New Morality.

Disagree with Christ if you want.  Don’t participate in His birthday celebration if you so choose.  But don’t make the illogical, false step of stealing Jesus’ birthday celebration by renaming it and claiming it as your own.  Don’t take advantage of your employer’s tradition of giving its employees Christmas day off, because that recognizes that Christmas celebrates Jesus’ birthday.  Don’t decorate your Christmas tree and purchase and wrap Christmas presents for your children, because that suggests Christmas commemorates Christ’s birth.

You can’t have it both ways, unless you are willing to adopt the illogicality of the new morality.  Apparently, many people are.

Yet another recent news article highlights the Illogicality of the New Morality.  On December 1st, The New York Times ran the article: LPGA Tour Accepts Transgender Players.  They did so less than two months after transgender golfer Lana Lawless sued the LPGA, saying the organization’s rules that a player must be “female at birth” are outdated and violate California’s civil rights law.

Lana is a 57-year old retired police officer who had a sex change operation (referred to nowadays as sex reassignment surgery) in 2005.  She now wants to compete against women who were born women.

Do I even need to insult your intelligence by pointing out the illogicality captured by this story?  Lana may have gone under the knife, but her physique – her musculoskeletal frame – is that of a man.  On average, men are bigger and stronger than women, which explains the LPGA’s former rule of allowing only players who were “female at birth” to compete.

Logic dictates that Lana will beat her undersized counterparts, because she will be playing on a course designed for women, using her male-born body to compete against players relying on their female-born bodies.  No, it’s not logical.  The new morality, however, is more interested in civil rights violations than logic.

This story would be worth no more than a passing, even humorous, glance if it wasn’t for the fact that the LPGA knuckled under to the new morality’s power and influence.  The LPGA, fearful of appearing archaic and discriminatory, now allows golfers such as Lana, grown men who are transgendered, to compete unfairly against ladies.

Yes, new morality epitomizes illogicality, and yet, for some strange reason, Americans continue to buy in to it, pretending it’s as logical as can be!