Nobody is immoral just because someone else says they are. Keeping this in mind is important. It comes in handy when self-righteous moralists take the stage and try to denigrate and punish those who disagree with them. In the eyes of the right wing, it is immoral to oppose the war, have an abortion, or not believe in Jesus and the literal word of the Bible.
But morality is personal conscience. That's why hiding a runaway slave before the Civil War, though totally immoral and illegal by Southern standards and Supreme Court dictate, was moral. That's why hiding a dissident from the state police was moral under Stalin, and harboring persecuted Jews under Hitler. It's moral to oppose unjust laws, as Rosa Parks and Gandhi did. One of the key ways that society advances is by having enough "immoral" people who follow their conscience.
This all seems so basic, but we face a generation that is being pounded by reactionary belief to the contrary. It would be all too easy to grow up in present-day America to believe that
--Hurricane victims, being poor and uneducated, are better off having their lives ruined so that they can collect government aid.
--Any Muslim-American should be regarded as a potential terrorist.
--Whatever deception it takes to get into a war is morally justified.
--Atheists are bad people. So is anyone who won't let a child pray in school.
--Abortions defy the command of God (even though the Bible is totally silent on the matter).
--Patriotism is more important than individual conscience. Likewise, the need for law and order is absolute.
--Free speech should be squelched in dissidents because they are troublemakers.
--Liberalism is the same as laissez-faire sexual behavior and tolerance for social losers. (Liberals also smoke pot.)
The list could go on ad infinitum, for once the moralists are in the saddle, their critique of everyone unlike themselves knows no limits. They ignore the fact that the majority of the public doesn't believe the Bible literally, backs the right to choose an abortion, and opposes the current war. What moralists want to do isn't convince anyone, however; they want to intimidate and crush them. How moral is that?
The right-wing moralists have succeeded to the extent that they have convinced the public that the Clinton administration was immoral. But when seven investigations are ferociously pursued, from Whitewater to travelgate, none of which resulted in a single official being indicted, a moral person would say that it's the inquisitors who might be immoral, not the innocent victims. Responders told me impatiently that I was wrong to say that the Clinton impeachment was trivial since it turned on a sexual indiscretion. They pointed out that I was ignorant of the facts, and that Clinton was impeached for lying to a grand jury.
What they overlook is that in matters of conscience, lying can be right. If you hide a runaway slave, it's right to lie to the police when they come to the door. In Clinton's case -- leaving aside that he was acquitted of these charges in the Senate, which right-wingers conveniently forget -- lying to a inquisitorial witch hunt seems defensible to me. I realize that my view isn't held by others, which is fine. But those others don't have a right to claim that I am bad, immoral, damned, or cast into the outer darkness just because my conscience speaks differently from theirs. Until they learn that lesson, I say two cheers for immorality.
Click: www.intentblog.com