The Coming "Moral Global Order" When all countries trumpet the moral high ground in promulgating their

views on the Iraqi War, the question arises as to just "Why" is there a need to morally justify it, and where is all this taking us? There is an inborn instinct in humankind to be repulsed at killing other humans. No doubt this is something God instilled in Eden, but he made it into law by writing it with his own finger in stone: "Thou shall not kill" (Exodus 20:13). This same God told Moses in the very next chapter: "Whoever hits a man, and he dies, he shall be surely put to death" (Ex. 21:12). In fact, this is a large list of offences for which the death penalty is imposed - even if your animal kills someone, or even if nobody dies from your actions, such as breaking the Sabbath, or having sex with animals (carrying that out today would help get rid of a load of spam!). Every country in the world has some kind of police force to enforce social order. While each country has varying ideas of what the "social good" is for its citizens, there is some type of retribution for people who are seen to disrupt that social order. In some countries the social order can be changed peacefully thru elections or coups, while in some countries there are those who try to change the social order thru more violent means. Probably all people believe they are morally "justified" for taking the actions they do. When social order ideas go cross-border, those on the receiving end can ignore, accept partially or fully, or reject them according to the laws in their own land. While these decisions about accepting or rejecting social order morals occur internally in a country, the voices of other countries are usually not heard in a direct way, and mostly ignored. When someone in country "A" starts to tell someone in country "B" that they must change their social order, there is the underlying philosophy that A thinks B's morals are incorrect. Ancient history is mostly the story of kings who made everyone, internally, and if possible, eternally, submit to their morals without having to consult their own constituents. This moral: "Might = Right" is heavily ingrained in human thinking. Only recently in human history has the moral: "Public Will = Right" gained the ascendancy. Almost unheard of 200 years ago, representative forms of government (democracy) have become the norm, and countries adopting this morality have seen their quality of life as measured in longevity, literacy, and wealth expand tremendously. The statistics back up the correctness of the new moral governing method as compared to the old, but does that make this morality absolutely correct? Financial trader W.D. Gann once made/passed on an observation about the public: "The public is always wrong". Others such as marketers and politicians sometimes say the reverse phrase: "The public is always right", but it's doubtful that anyone really believes either of these extremes 100%. So where are we to go for the moral Last Word? Who, or what, is or has absolute moral authority? If he/she/it can be found, then it is a given that government by or using that entity will receive the most support from the most people, and thus be able to direct the social order for all adhering to the democracy model morals. <a href="">"The -----------is the first power which not only recognises, but puts into practice, the high principles of the Papacy."</a>

<a href="">"The best way to honor Pope -------, truly one of the great men, is to take his teaching seriously; is to listen to his words and put his words and teachings into action here in -------. This is a challenge we must accept."</a> One of the two quotes above is by Hitler's Deputy (Vice-Chancellor of the Reich) Franz von Papen, on January 14, 1934, and the other is by President Bush on March 22, 2001. Does anyone notice any similarities? ----------------------------------------------------Reference: <a href=" es#tx1">"Finding the Moral High Ground in Iraq & Beyond"</a>By Lieutenant Commander David G. Kibble, Royal Naval Reserve (Retired) Proceedings, December 2002 <a href=",11538,901311,00.html"> "Blair in 'prickly' meeting at the Vatican"</a> Sophie Arie Rome Sunday February 23, 2003 <a href=",2933,80999,00.html"> "A Look at the Chirac and the Pope Situation"</a> Thursday, March 13, 2003 By Bill O'Reilly <a href="">"Behind U.S.Vatican rift on Iraq, doubts about one-superpower world"</a> By John Thavis Catholic News Service March 6, 2003 <a href="">"British prime minister's papal meeting part of 'immersion' weekend"</a> NEWS BRIEFS Feb-24-2003 By Catholic News Service <a href="">"The Prospect of War against Iraq"</a> Diocese of Oxford Bishop's Office 2002/12 <a href="">Operation Iraqi Freedom</a> Press Briefing Excerpts - 3/10/03 "This is a moral issue" <a href="">Remarks by the President at Dedication of the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center</a> 2001/3/22 "the highest moral authority on earth." <a href="URL"></a>

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful