I am, once
again, going to wade into the political and - at times - almost religious, presidential debate. To be more specific, I feel that I must once again address
the topic of Mr. Donald J. Trump. I am hearing a re-occurring theme: we must choose the lesser of two evils; we must not let Hillary become president at any cost; a vote for anyone but Trump is a vote for Hillary. I will start off my commentary of these statements by saying that I believe these "moral" arguments, first, have no real moral basis, and second, are extremely detrimental - even destructive - to our nation as a whole.
I will begin by addressing the topic of the lesser of two evils as a moral argument. To initiate my foray into this topic, I sill ask a simple question: can we ever morally choose to do evil? A vast majority of people asked that question will quickly reply with a resounding, "no." Apply that to the lesser of two evils idea and suddenly we realize that there is actually no moral basis for choosing the lesser of two evils. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Not only is this fact, but a deep search into the Bible (Catholics may also want to consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church) will reveal that there is no such "doctrine" or "moral rule" even implicitly implied. In fact - on the topic of the bible - I would like to direct you to Romans 16:17-20:
To illustrate this, I will offer a rather gruesome analogy. Let us say that a person is placed in front of you, and you are told that you must either rape them, or kill them, and if you do neither, they will simply kill the person. You cannot rape the person and then claim that you "did the least amount of damage" and thus chose the "lesser of two evils." That's not how evil and good work.
On a side note, if you are wondering where the "doctrine" of choosing the lesser of two evils comes from I would direct you to the Law of Dual Effect. In which one may choose to do a good or neutral action which results in a evil and good outcome. The emphasis here is that the action which produces the good and evil result must be at least a morally neutral action and the evil produced must not outweigh the good attained. Additionally, the good cannot be a result of the evil, but rather, must be a direct consequence of the good or morally neutral action. This unequivocally denounces the idea of choosing the lesser of two evils. One may not vote for someone who is evil, because it is evil to support an evil person. One may not choose to do evil for good intentions, even if not choosing that evil inevitably leads to a worse evil being preformed.
To clarify, I do not believe that we must only vote for Catholics, or Christians, or Jews, or even people who believe in God. I am fully and completely aware that our country is full of imperfect people, myself undeniably included in those ranks. It would be just as foolhardy to believe that I can only vote for a perfect person as it would for me to believe that I can write a perfect article. That being said, it is important to distinguish between imperfect and evil. Everyone is imperfect, but those who actively seek to do evil aid the evil and in effect become the evil, in so far as evil is the absence of good.
With that important point out of the way, I will now address the topic of voting for Mr. Trump directly. Clearly, one of the first things we must do is discern whether Mr. Trump is really an evil person, or merely imperfect. However, before we can do that we must establish something: we cannot knowingly make decisions based on the inclinations of a weak conscience. Biblical reference (Catholics I forward you to CCC 1791):
To be clear, there are many, many, situations in which we cannot operate on a complete knowledge of a given situation. However, our judgements must still be based on the facts that we do have, not the facts that we don't have. If you believe that Mr. Trump is not as bad as Hillary, then, assuming he is not evil, you would be obligated by your conscience to vote for him. But by saying that, "we don't know if he's as bad," you are admitting that you are only operating on the hope that he is not as bad, in which case you would be making a decision that lacks a well-formed conscience.
To continue, we must ascertain whether Mr. Trump is evil or merely imperfect. An imperfect man has faults (obviously), is oftentimes persistent in his faults, but as a whole does not actively incite evil, be it by his actions or words. Whereas an evil man is not only persistant in his evil, but also incites others to follow him. In other words, he causes, "divisions and offenses contrary to," the Doctrine of Christ. With this established, I will address a few of the issues in which Mr. Trump has taken a moral stance on things.
The first thing that comes to mind is abortion. This is a popular litmus test used by many Christians to decide who to vote for (even though I am seeing more and more people say that they do not vote on "one issue alone"). Morality of voting for someone who is not pro-life aside, Mr. Trump has surely said many things about this topic, good and bad.
In recent years, he has said many good things. However, here's the problem. Unfortunately, Mr. Trump has said a great many things on the topic of abortion, ranging from being against a ban on partial birth abortion, to saying that he is "very pro-life" and that he want's to end funding for Planned Parenthood. Thus, in order to accurately make a judgement on whether he is truly Pro-Life, we must examine his actions, and not his words, since his words conflict with each other.
First of all, his conversion story is very fishy. But, to make matters worse, Mr. Trump hasn't actually done anything to prove his Pro-Life "stance". When a mans word conflicts with the words of his past, we must see proof that his word is true. In a situation as volatile as being President of the United States, it is of the up-most importance that we know for sure. Thus, we can only conclude that the bad actions of Mr. Trump in this area from the past, and the lack of good actions in this area now, indicate that there is almost no substantial evidence that would indicate that Mr. Trump is Pro-Life.
Also important, we must examine Mr. Trumps regard for the human person. To do this, we must look no further than google to find the numerous times where Mr. Trump degraded even the most innocent of people. From his despicable treatment to reporters with disability, to his, frankly, disgusting history of mistreating women, to his book where he openly talks about his sexualized past, there can be no doubt that Mr. Trump really has no regard for the human person. Certainly, at the very least, not where the dignity of women are concerned. The bottom line is, only a man who is of deplorable mental and moral condition would even insinuate that he might act in a sexual way towards his own daughter.
I do not have time to go into all of Mr. Trumps stances (of which there are many and all are not lacking in contradiction), but these alone should indicate the lack of truth in his life. In fact, if you look to google and do your civic duty to have a knowledge of the political candidates, you will find many other sources show he is not as Christian as he claims, and further articles that discuss his many debaucheries and evil tendencies. Therefore, if anything, it should be very easy to establish whether he is worse than Hillary or not (if that comparison even mattered in the first place).
Ultimately, this is a decision that we all must make on our own. However, it is a decision that is not lacking in moral obligations. To summarize what I have laid out: you cannot choose an evil to avoid a greater evil, you have an obligation to clarify an weak conscience ("I don't know for sure" is not an acceptable answer), and Mr. Trump, at least from the issues I have shown, proves to be an evil man. However, that is my understanding of the situation based on fact and reason. You must form your understanding in the same way. In short, I cannot tell you unequivocally whether Mr. Trump is an evil man, or just an imperfect one. My personal studies lead me to believe that it is quite obvious that he is a truly evil man. However, you must arrive at these beliefs on your own or I have done nothing.
I will begin by addressing the topic of the lesser of two evils as a moral argument. To initiate my foray into this topic, I sill ask a simple question: can we ever morally choose to do evil? A vast majority of people asked that question will quickly reply with a resounding, "no." Apply that to the lesser of two evils idea and suddenly we realize that there is actually no moral basis for choosing the lesser of two evils. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Not only is this fact, but a deep search into the Bible (Catholics may also want to consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church) will reveal that there is no such "doctrine" or "moral rule" even implicitly implied. In fact - on the topic of the bible - I would like to direct you to Romans 16:17-20:
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil. And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. AmenPaul is very clear: we are to mark those who actively bring about things contrary to the Doctrine of Christ, and avoid them. He doesn't just say we are to decry their moral attributes and follow them insofar as they do some good. If someone is causing divisions and offenses contrary to the Doctrine of Christ, we cannot knowingly aid them.
To illustrate this, I will offer a rather gruesome analogy. Let us say that a person is placed in front of you, and you are told that you must either rape them, or kill them, and if you do neither, they will simply kill the person. You cannot rape the person and then claim that you "did the least amount of damage" and thus chose the "lesser of two evils." That's not how evil and good work.
On a side note, if you are wondering where the "doctrine" of choosing the lesser of two evils comes from I would direct you to the Law of Dual Effect. In which one may choose to do a good or neutral action which results in a evil and good outcome. The emphasis here is that the action which produces the good and evil result must be at least a morally neutral action and the evil produced must not outweigh the good attained. Additionally, the good cannot be a result of the evil, but rather, must be a direct consequence of the good or morally neutral action. This unequivocally denounces the idea of choosing the lesser of two evils. One may not vote for someone who is evil, because it is evil to support an evil person. One may not choose to do evil for good intentions, even if not choosing that evil inevitably leads to a worse evil being preformed.
To clarify, I do not believe that we must only vote for Catholics, or Christians, or Jews, or even people who believe in God. I am fully and completely aware that our country is full of imperfect people, myself undeniably included in those ranks. It would be just as foolhardy to believe that I can only vote for a perfect person as it would for me to believe that I can write a perfect article. That being said, it is important to distinguish between imperfect and evil. Everyone is imperfect, but those who actively seek to do evil aid the evil and in effect become the evil, in so far as evil is the absence of good.
With that important point out of the way, I will now address the topic of voting for Mr. Trump directly. Clearly, one of the first things we must do is discern whether Mr. Trump is really an evil person, or merely imperfect. However, before we can do that we must establish something: we cannot knowingly make decisions based on the inclinations of a weak conscience. Biblical reference (Catholics I forward you to CCC 1791):
Zechariah 8:16 These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace;In other words, we are to make sure that our judgements are good ones. If we "don't know" if our judgements are true, we have an obligation to pursue and find the truth before we make these judgments. Thus, if you are claiming that it is okay for you to vote for Mr. Trump because you "don't really know" if he's as bad as Hillary you are merely admitting to yourself that you have not done your duty to make sure your judgements are true. You cannot make a decision in this case and would be morally culpable for doing so.
To be clear, there are many, many, situations in which we cannot operate on a complete knowledge of a given situation. However, our judgements must still be based on the facts that we do have, not the facts that we don't have. If you believe that Mr. Trump is not as bad as Hillary, then, assuming he is not evil, you would be obligated by your conscience to vote for him. But by saying that, "we don't know if he's as bad," you are admitting that you are only operating on the hope that he is not as bad, in which case you would be making a decision that lacks a well-formed conscience.
To continue, we must ascertain whether Mr. Trump is evil or merely imperfect. An imperfect man has faults (obviously), is oftentimes persistent in his faults, but as a whole does not actively incite evil, be it by his actions or words. Whereas an evil man is not only persistant in his evil, but also incites others to follow him. In other words, he causes, "divisions and offenses contrary to," the Doctrine of Christ. With this established, I will address a few of the issues in which Mr. Trump has taken a moral stance on things.
The first thing that comes to mind is abortion. This is a popular litmus test used by many Christians to decide who to vote for (even though I am seeing more and more people say that they do not vote on "one issue alone"). Morality of voting for someone who is not pro-life aside, Mr. Trump has surely said many things about this topic, good and bad.
In recent years, he has said many good things. However, here's the problem. Unfortunately, Mr. Trump has said a great many things on the topic of abortion, ranging from being against a ban on partial birth abortion, to saying that he is "very pro-life" and that he want's to end funding for Planned Parenthood. Thus, in order to accurately make a judgement on whether he is truly Pro-Life, we must examine his actions, and not his words, since his words conflict with each other.
First of all, his conversion story is very fishy. But, to make matters worse, Mr. Trump hasn't actually done anything to prove his Pro-Life "stance". When a mans word conflicts with the words of his past, we must see proof that his word is true. In a situation as volatile as being President of the United States, it is of the up-most importance that we know for sure. Thus, we can only conclude that the bad actions of Mr. Trump in this area from the past, and the lack of good actions in this area now, indicate that there is almost no substantial evidence that would indicate that Mr. Trump is Pro-Life.
Also important, we must examine Mr. Trumps regard for the human person. To do this, we must look no further than google to find the numerous times where Mr. Trump degraded even the most innocent of people. From his despicable treatment to reporters with disability, to his, frankly, disgusting history of mistreating women, to his book where he openly talks about his sexualized past, there can be no doubt that Mr. Trump really has no regard for the human person. Certainly, at the very least, not where the dignity of women are concerned. The bottom line is, only a man who is of deplorable mental and moral condition would even insinuate that he might act in a sexual way towards his own daughter.
I do not have time to go into all of Mr. Trumps stances (of which there are many and all are not lacking in contradiction), but these alone should indicate the lack of truth in his life. In fact, if you look to google and do your civic duty to have a knowledge of the political candidates, you will find many other sources show he is not as Christian as he claims, and further articles that discuss his many debaucheries and evil tendencies. Therefore, if anything, it should be very easy to establish whether he is worse than Hillary or not (if that comparison even mattered in the first place).
Ultimately, this is a decision that we all must make on our own. However, it is a decision that is not lacking in moral obligations. To summarize what I have laid out: you cannot choose an evil to avoid a greater evil, you have an obligation to clarify an weak conscience ("I don't know for sure" is not an acceptable answer), and Mr. Trump, at least from the issues I have shown, proves to be an evil man. However, that is my understanding of the situation based on fact and reason. You must form your understanding in the same way. In short, I cannot tell you unequivocally whether Mr. Trump is an evil man, or just an imperfect one. My personal studies lead me to believe that it is quite obvious that he is a truly evil man. However, you must arrive at these beliefs on your own or I have done nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment