What They're Saying:

  • "Sean writes passionately... Make sure you read the whole thing."
    Captains Quarters

    "Sean has more common sense than the entire New York Times editorial board, and his prose is better, too."
    Amy Ridenour's
    National Center Blog

    "This guy is blowing me away with his posts - I'm just sorry I didn't start reading his blog sooner."
    Who Moved My Truth?

    "Sean is so right he is wrong. It's good to be wrong when you're right. Right? Follow me? Follow Sean:"
    Ryan's Head

    "Sean at Everything I Know Is Wrong is, in my mind, rarely, if not never, wrong. [I think I just wore out my comma key]... His website is one of my favorites and I really enjoy reading his posts."
    The Rocketsled to Hell

The Constitution of the United States


The 101st Fighting Keyboards

« If I Had a Party Affiliation. | Main | This should pop the balloon belonging to the "Bush lied about WMD's" camp. »

December 23, 2003



But most liberals and "leftists" are not moral relativists. They may be moral pluralists, recognizing that there are different moral systems and that people should be able to practice their own ethics, within certain limits. The certain limits has always been attached to almost all liberalism, and those limits are defined by the ethos that runs across all forms of tolerance, namely, that any practice stop short of infringing on the rights and freedoms of other individuals.



Your comment reads like a manifesto for moral relativism. Your statement, "But most liberals and ‘leftists’ are not moral relativists," shows a profound misunderstanding of liberal philosophy. The hallmark of liberalism is moral relativism.

The idea that limits on liberalism are “defined by the ethos that runs across all forms of tolerance, namely, that any practice stop short of infringing on the rights and freedoms of other individuals,” is preposterous in light of the entire history of liberal governmental policy.

Let’s just take a look at one teeny-weeny, itsy-bitsy, little policy called “progressive taxation.” By this method liberals have stolen money from people who have earned it, and given it to people who have not. They have infringed on the right for equal protection under the law. They have infringed in the right to be treated the same as other people. You can’t say it’s right to take 60% of this persons money but take only 5 % of that persons money (or in the case of 50% percent of our population, 0%) and say it is ok, without ascribing to moral relativism.

Lets look at another, not so teeny-weeny, itsy-bitsy, little policy called “affirmative action” or, as it should be called, racism. By insisting on quotas in hiring, and promotion, and enrollment leftists have changed the color of the people being discriminated against, but they have not changed what racism is. Racism is wrong. You can’t say, “racism is wrong unless it is against white people.” It’s just wrong. To say anything else is to ascribe wholesale to moral relativism.

Answer this question honestly: Do you believe that abortion is a good thing? Or is it a bad thing? I have never met anyone who said abortion is a good thing. Ever. The most ringing endorsement I have ever heard for abortion, is this: “I would never have one myself, but who am I to choose for other people?” This one statement shows the moral bankruptcy of liberalism, the cowardice of leftism, and the foundation of moral relativism supporting them both.


Moral relativism is what makes free will palatable, even attractive.

You cannot use logic to prove that affirmative action is wrong, that abortion is wrong, etc. They are wrong solely on the grounds that they are choices you would never make. There is no further justification, it would seem.

If you choose or would choose abortion, affirmative action, and so on, then they are morally acceptable choices for you. I firmly believe that your choices create who you are.

For instance, I can say that more than anything, I want to find a cure for cancer, for that is very important to me. I would be lying of course, because I have never given a cent to cancer research. In fact, I've spent more money on sporting events than on humanitarian aid or charity, so my actions clearly show that I value sports more than I value finding a cure for cancer, charity or humanitarian aid.

To say that progressive taxes promote the "overall social good" is absurd, because it doesn't exist. We have a society of individuals, and their rights should be respected.


The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

Subscribe to EIKIW feed.

Day By Day

Advertising One

"Global Warming"

"Climate Change"

Advertising Two

Advertising Three


  • Listed on 

  • blogopoly-piece-everythingiknowiswrong.jpg

  • blogping.png

  • a

TTLB Ecosystem