The DictatorshiP of Relativism

When it comes to the issue of gay marriage, the Jewish Theological Seminary blinked and gave way to society’s shifting mores.

So one must ask the question: Should we guide religion, or should religion guide us?
‘Goldilocks’ faith serves lukewarm mush

..For several generations, most Americans have embraced what could be described as the Goldilocks attitude toward religion: affirming faith choices that seemed not too soft but not too hard, not too hot but not too cool. Majorities viewed easy-going moderation and comforting compromise as the religious path that counted as “just right.” ..

Religious liberals in Christian as well as Jewish denominations call it hypocritical to focus on biblical definitions of marriage or sanctions against homosexuality, while readily disregarding so many other rules from Scripture.

Despite Old Testament references, they note, most people don’t marry multiple wives today, or employ slave-like indentured servants in our homes, or avoid eating shellfish. But the Bible merely permitted polygamy and indentured servitude in certain circumstances, never commanding those practices for everyone. In Jewish law, male-female marriage, on the other hand, is a mitzvah — an obligation, a commandment. And to this day, Conservative Judaism still doesn’t sanction shrimp.

Recent history in both the Jewish and Christian communities suggests he’s wrong: Disaffected young people seldom flock to watered-down versions of religious faith that lack continuity or integrity.

The rapidly growing denominations are those that make demands on potential adherents and advance clear standards of right and wrong. That’s why Evangelical and Pentecostal Christianity has grown while “mainline” Protestant denominations have dwindled, and why traditionalist Catholicism boasts more worldwide vitality than liberal strains of the church.

Meanwhile, Mormons uphold multiple restrictions (giving up alcohol, coffee, tobacco, among other things) and yet constitute one of the fastest-growing creeds in the USA.

Talk of “pluralism” only dodges the issue, because if religion fails to provide forceful guidance on the most crucial behavioral issues of life, it offers only meager servings of lukewarm porridge.

That might be good enough for Goldilocks, but it won’t nourish the spiritual seekers who desire — and deserve — more commitment and clarity.


Sorry Moral Lib relativists.
If an act is wrong, it is wrong for all of eternity.
Yea. I know, that’s a darn long time.


There are no politically correct “exceptions to the rule”.
The law of God doesn’t go kaput at your whims.
No “surrounding considerations.”, no ” social context”. And before you come undone…….
Christian and Jewish scholars acknowledge “just and unjust slavery” and even “just and unjust war.”


In Biblical times, thieves where “enslaved” by the very ones they stole from, instead of facing imprisonment or death. They payed retribution and were commanded by the Bible to be treated humanely.

Sorry to thwart your efforts at worldwide atheism and socialism Libs, but War is not condemned as evil in and of itself.

There are exceptions ..yea ..but guess what.
God gets to to decide where to permit the exceptions.

A so called “exception” to the Ten Commandment’s Sixth Commandment :”You shall not murder (kill),” can be found in Christian as well as Jewish interpretations and offers three occasions where killing is permissible: in self-defense, in times of war, and in the commission of justice.

They are open to interpretation by trusted Sages and Scholars but…outdated?..Not quite.


Lib relativists jus luvvvvvv slogans.

“Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.”
“One man’s meat is another man’s poison.”

Perhaps how good looking someone is, or what to order for lunch may be relative, but Truth, virtue and duty don’t lie in “the eye of the beholder.”

It’s high time to chuck out and jettison the claptrap of moral relativism which emerged in the social upheaval of the 1960s, which is responsible for the modern disfunctional society we so “enjoy”.


And guess what.

Moral relativism is in itself an absolutist moral posture.

Does it not declare that no one moral system has the right to impose itself over another moral system.

Think about it…if the ahem… “relativists” were truly “relative”, they would instead have to be of the opinion that if a particular morality includes condeming another then that posture is relatively right for the moral code in question.

Sufficiently confused? Heh.


Leviticus 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

Pretty straighfoward is it not?

It is for God to meet out judgement and punishment.
It is for us to defend God’s right to do such.

NukesNews&Viewshas the latest on gun control..and
Shared lovingly with my friends at Perri Nelson’s Website, Blog @, The Random Yak, Adam’s Blog, Maggie’s Notebook, basil’s blog, The Pet Haven Blog, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Pursuing Holiness, Faultline USA, third world county, stikNstein… has no mercy, Blue Star Chronicles, and Planck’s Constant, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.


45 Responses to “The DictatorshiP of Relativism”

  1. Gayle says:

    There you go again, Angel – stating the obvious. Goodness hon, don’t you know that these people aren’t reasonable! ;)

    Seriously, great job!

  2. Jeff says:

    So what about lesbian marriage? Technically speaking, it’s not outlawed in the Torah. I’ve always wondered this.

  3. jay says:

    The sad irony is that liberal priests and rabbis, who are recognized and empowered by their respective religions, use those very powers to “change” the laws of the religion!! how hypocritical!!

    Great work.

  4. Blog @ » Blog Archive » Open Trackback Linkfest and QotD says:

    [...] Woman Honor Thyself Says: April 25th, 2007 at 5:52 pm The DictatorshiP of Relativism… [...]

  5. Perri Nelson says:

    Excellent post Angel, better even than usual, and that’s a hard thing!

    Jeff, you need to learn to think. Lesbian marriage may not “technically” be outlawed in the Torah, but tell me something: Don’t you think that a moral principal that applies to men would also apply to women?

    Just because the rule is specifically directed at men doesn’t mean it doesn’t apply equally to women. At the time the Torah was written, the culture was predominantly male dominated. It would have been unnatural for the writers of the day to say “this applies to both men and women” at every turn when by speaking to men the implication is that the law applied to both sexes.

    Women were typically mentioned when there was a compelling reason to do so, for example when the Torah discussed the disposition of the case when a woman was raped in the wilderness vs. in the city.

    Trying to pick apart the moral principals laid down to find “exceptions” to them to justify immoral acts is one of the basic techniques for promoting moral relativism. Evil is evil, no matter how you try to rationalize it away.

  6. zionflag says:

    Hey Angel, got an important question?
    Is there a watered-down Islamic religion, (ya know kill infidels only on tuesday, when we read the Koran at mosque, wear veils but only when wrinkles appear under the eyes, morality applies on the street but never around the pool, eat burekas instead of wearing them, you get the smoke,no!)?

  7. Concerned Citizen says:

    We should undoubtably let the religion lead us. If you are a Christain, you should understand that Christ said, “I am the way.” I don’t recall him saying, “I am the way, unless you have a better idea or it is more conveinent for you to do it some other way. Whatever.”

    A lot of liberals will point out this law or that law in the Old Testament and say why not those. They will cit examples of even God’s chosen people committing sin and ask why God put up with that if he did not approve of it.

    I think it is terribly dangerous to use human behavior as a guage for what God will accept versus using his own words. To point out that so and so had multiple wives and he was a chosen intrument of God, only means that man is incapable of living up to the expectations that go has for us. We are by nature sinful beings.

    What we should remember from those exampels in the bible is that men like David, Abraham and Moses were nothing more than tools that God chose to use. Just as a hammer can do wonders in the hands of an artisan, but then be cast aside and be indistinguishable from any other hammer, so can a man do woders through the will of God but be not different than any other man.

  8. ZionistYoungster says:

    Thanks for another principle-teaching post, Angel.

    PC religion can be called idolatry of the mind. We all know of the physical idolatry that consists in worshiping the work of your fingers; PC religion is the same, except that it’s about worshiping what your mind has invented. Physical idolatry involves worshiping your ideas of divinity rather than the true one, while the mental idolatry of PC religion involves worshiping G-d your way instead of His.

    Another point, perhaps minor: the correct translation of the Sixth Commandment is, “Thou shalt not murder”. Murder, as opposed to killing, is situational, though that shouldn’t be considered a problem, because situational ethics and moral relativism aren’t synonyms (contrary to the popular misconception). Moral relativism is to say every society has its own, legitimate system of morality–in effect, a circumlocution for saying there’s no such thing as morality (meaning ethical principles and rules applying to all humans because they’re humans).

  9. Layla says:

    The left promotes a doctrine of hate and evil. They are children of the devil. Any true child of God, honors the Word of God, not makes it of no effect.

  10. George Samek, CW-3 US Army Retired says:

    Welcome to the wonderful world of marrage.

    With the right pardner there is nothing on earth like it.
    With the wrong pardner there sure as hell is nothing like it on earth.

    Marrage has its responsibilitys, if it sours you are now included in the after after glow

    She/He gets the gold mine. She/he gets the shaft.

    Very Good Advise Its cheeper to keep Her/Him, welcome to divorce court new guy/girl.

  11. Angel says:

    Thanks so much y’all for the additions, corrections and smiles! :)

  12. Jungle Mom says:

    Being a fifth generation Baptist, all I can say is , AMEN!!!

  13. Kate says:

    I have a reader who asks me if I want to “stone” him, or any other homosexual, every time I post anything on this subject.

  14. Avoiceofreason says:


    If you take the first clause, do you have to take the second clause of the statements from the scriptures? His question is not at all unreasonable.

  15. Avoiceofreason says:

    BTW, I don’t “support” same sex marriage, but my reasons are not from scriptural reasons. It would be that I don’t hold “marriage” as a Constitutional right, since it requires a license, which implies the state is authorized to restrict the action. In a secular society, be careful when you pull out holy text to defend your position.

    Honestly, I don’t really care too much what my neighbors are doing in their bedroom. Thinking about other’s sex life to me – whether they are gay or straight – is a bit tawdry.

  16. bernie says:

    Is there a watered-down Islamic religion…?

    Who would have minded a watered down Nazism? Islam should be watered down because it is too barbaric. But why should anyone water down any of the following:

    Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
    Blessed are the meek: for they shall posses the land.
    Blessed are they who mourn: for they shall be comforted.
    Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

    If everyone strictly followed the Beatitudes to the letter the world would be paradise, but when only one person follows the Quran strictly there is hell on earth.

  17. Douglas V. Gibbs says:

    The left has decided that between right and wrong this is a gray area that can be achieved by explanations and compromise.

  18. Avoiceofreason says:

    I’m not politically on the left, but I don’t believe that I have the full weight of many matters with regard to morality. Morality is typically formed by cultural norms. What was moral and normal is changed by the values a culture gives to an action.

    Would you deem horsewhipping a criminal a “morally just” act? I think that many religious people wouldn’t deem it as such, yet it was common practice 100 years ago, as was people marrying at the age of 15 or 16 was 200 years ago. Would that be considered “moral” today?

    Morals are often encoded by statute, this also reflects a change in views. I would propose that 2000 years ago what many people considered moral would be considered barbarous by society today, and the opposite is true.

    While I believe in natural law, and in some “universal imperatives” that derive from natural law, I would also suggest that sexuality is not one of those issues which are settled moral law. Would you propose marriage of a cousin as an immoral act? Don’t use the Bible as a proof text than for your view of morality on that topic, because the practice was common in ancient times and is verified by looking at the lineage provided by scriptures.

    If your premise is that the “Word of God” provides examples of behavior which is moral, I would counter, and I happen to believe in God rather fervently, that there are certain moral paradoxes found within scripture, and to mention a few Jepthath’s vow concerning his daughter, the drinking of the bitter waters in cases of jealous husbands, Paul’s inconsistency with regard to women speaking publicly in Christian meetings being determined by cultural norms, instances regarding Paul’s reaction to circumcision requirements of Gentiles.

    One of the most appealing aspects of my faith, which is Christianity, and I don’t mean to use this as a soapbox, is the way that it allows cultural norms to be diffused within a core set of beliefs. In reality, there are likely very few things which are inherently right or wrong. Most are just neutral or the motivational forces behind them make them right or wrong. Or, indeed, they are just what you say that the left has done, they are grey, and morally neutral.

    And whether or not anyone particularly likes it, there were in fact cultural reasons for a tribal community, which was never a large group and needed a high birth rate for their tribes to have a chance at success, to have regulations prohibiting homosexuality. That may not defuse a moral imperative on this issue, but it does offer an explanation for the prohibition of this behavior.

    I also think from my dealings with many who are religiously conservative that a good many of them would like to be the executors of divine retribution, if that is their end reward. I”m not saying that about you or anyone in particular here, but I know what I see and what I hear. I would caution about acting as if one is God; you’re highly likely to piss the real one off.

  19. Avoiceofreason says:

    Sorry to keep posting, but there are so many great things to opine about. I hope my comments are not seen as overly cynical.

    There are so many mentions of the “left” here. What exactly is the Right wold be my question.

    Are you of the “right” if you are a traditional conservative in the mold of Barry Goldwater that wanted small government, few intrusions by the Federal into the state and high amounts of libertarianism thrown in?
    Are you of the right when you want BIG government with HUGE intrusions of the Federal into daily life with low regard for libertarianism thrown in as shown by NCLB, The Patriot Act and “The War on Drugs”.
    Are you of the left when you support such “big government” positions as shown by the three I mentioned and add The New Deal and some of The Great Society programs thrown in.
    Are you of the right when you side with those who would say yes to expressions of religion in the public domain such as The Ten Commandments being on public displays, religious markers – including Wiccan due to a recent court ruling – being allowed to be put in government owned cemeteries for veterans at tax payer expenses (38 religions – now 39 are officially allowed)
    or Are you of the left when you feel that Wicca markers should be paid for by your tax dollars.
    Are you of the Left or the Right when you contemplate the full circle that “Conservativism” has undergone when you look at the start of the GOP as a “more conservative” political organization dedicated to stopping the expansion of slavery, but shifted pretty radically left when Emancipation – was imposed on rebellious states, and then the Radical COngress of the 1860′s and 70′s were they left or right?

    The terms themself are hard to monitor as being of the left/liberal or being of the right/conservative has little meaning anymore.

    When I define myself as a Conservative by saying I like BIG Government with regard to The Patriot Act, NCLB, The “war on drugs” and even more liberal aspects of it such as The New Deal, Social Security, and The Great Society, I also realize that I am in favor of unions and worry about the ecology of the planet, and kind of like that the Feds stepped in and mandated civil rights in 1964 as well as intergration of public schools in 1952,and most of all what makes me self defined as a Conservative, is that I’m as HAWKISH as they come, well, except for the loonies who are to the right of me!

    Such labels are impossible to uphold anymore in today’s hegemony of political stances.

  20. What is a Liberal; What is a Conservative. « A Voice of Reason: Sane Views for a Crazy World says:

    [...] What is a Liberal; What is a Conservative. Filed under: Gay Rights, McCain, Thompson, Illegal Aliens, Second Amendment, First Amendment, Corporatism, ACLU, Patriot Act, Democrat, Republican, Edwards, High Stakes Testing, Brownback, Tancredo, War Protest, PoliticalScience, Romney, Obama, Giuliani, Election ’08, Primaries, Gingrich, Liberals, Adoption, Culture, Iraq, Unions, Education, UN, History, Christianity, Politics, Family, Military, Philosophy, Terrorism, Multiculturalism, Abortion, Conservatives, Global Warming, Israel, Bush, NCLB, Middle East, Congress, Supreme Court, Religion — avoiceofreason @ 5:50 am This brilliant post came as a result of a discussion on Woman Honor Thyself about gay rights.  I love discussions which make me think, and something that had been ticking away just came out.  It was one of my replies to many of the comments of “the left says this”. [...]

  21. pommygranate says:


    Couldnt agree more.

    The best argument i have come across against moral relativism is this.

    In Australia of 1907, women could not vote, Aboriginals had no rights whatsoever, gays were outlawed and only folk of a white skin coud emigrate to Australia.

    Fast forward one hundred years and all this has changed.

    Now which is the ‘superior’ culture? Australia in 1907 or 2007?

    If you see no difference (i.e. you are a moral relativist), then why did we all fight so hard for gay rights, for womens rights, for universal emancipation and for Aboriginal rights? Why did we bother?

    btw – You might like this post for some Moral Relativist Science Laws amongst others.

  22. Avoiceofreason says:

    So gay rights
    Feminism and/or universal suffrage
    Cultural sensitivity to indigenous people (multiculturalism) and their rights
    And liberalization of immigration policies are all moral advances if you take that 2007 is a better moral climate.

    I don’t disagree with your statement, but I wonder if others would.

  23. pommygranate says:


    Im talking about giving Aboriginals the vote. You dont think that’s an advance? Would you rather women still couldn’t vote? An white only in Australia? Err, who exactly would argue with this?

  24. Avoiceofreason says:

    Not at all.
    I think your points all show advancement of morality.

    I think that many would argue that gay rights, feminism, cultural sensitivity and rights to indigenous people and liberalization of immigration policies are all positives to a culture.

    I have a feeling that a large theme of this thread would not say that all of these are advances. I also think that those in 1907 thought they were morally okay for their time period. Morals shift with time and are framed by a cultural construct was my disagreement with others who had posted here, as any shifting is inherently showing relativism.

  25. Neil says:

    “I have a reader who asks me if I want to “stone” him, or any other homosexual, every time I post anything on this subject.”

    That is a popular dodge used by pro-gay groups. Leviticus 18 contains universal moral laws. Note how it starts and ends with warnings not to be like the pagan Canaanites, then lists their sins such as homosexual behavior.

    Leviticus 21, which contains the stoning command, is Israelite-specific (they were living in a theocracy at the time).

    So the penalty isn’t applicable today, but it is still a sin (see Romans 1 as well – Lesbians are mentioned there).

    Some people like to minimize the Israelite penalty for homosexual behavior by claiming that people could get stoned for working on the Sabbath, etc. at that time. But that gets the point backwards: The punishment is indicative of how serious the sin is.

  26. Neil says:

    P.S. Great post!

  27. Angel says:


  28. Right Truth says:

    Legislating your thoughts, feelings, and beliefs…

    The wicked witches of Congress are stirring up a nasty brew, a bill to legislate your ‘”thoughts, feelings, and beliefs” into criminal offenses and put Christians in the bull’s-eye.’ What was considered politically correct (or is it politically in…

  29. Webloggin - Blog Archive » Democrats To Exclude Military From Hate Crimes Protection says:

    [...] See: Woman Honor Thyself who has two related articles, The Dictatorship of Relativism and R U a Boy or Girl? [...]

  30. Webloggin - Blog Archive » Legislating Your Thoughts, Feelings, and Beliefs says:

    [...] See: Woman Honor Thyself who has two related articles, The Dictatorship of Relativism and R U a Boy or Girl? [...]

  31. John Kaiser says:

    Sad, ain’t it? Maybe one day the world will wake up. I fear that by then it will be too late.

  32. Gayle says:

    Hi Angel. Sorry for getting here so late. Been busy!

    Yes, the Episcopalian Church (my church) is having a very hard time with this subject. Many conservatives are extremely pissed off about the total ignoring of God’s word on this matter. It’s going to cause a huge rift if this doesn’t get resolved.

    I have no issue with homosexuals attending our services or even being members of the church. The church, after all, should welcome sinners,because we all are sinners in one way or another. Jesus was the only one who was ever perfect. I do take issue with gay Priests or Bishops. I would not take communion from them.

    It’s another most excellent post, Angel!

  33. Brooke says:

    If there’s one thing a lefty cannot handle, it’s a moral absolute!

    How sad for the Jewish faith that their Theological society is so corrupt.

  34. michael says:

    interesting post. I always thought that “moral relativism” was just another form of intellectual sloth.

    It can be difficult to take an absolute position (to say, “This thing is always evil,” or “This position is always right.”) because you are then always on the defensive.

    But you are also forced to consider your opinions, and form arguments to defend them.

  35. ZionistYoungster says:


    The Jewish Theological Seminary is a center of Conservative Judaism. Conservative Judaism, like Reform Judaism, is not considered a valid form of Judaism by Orthodox Jews, because of their taking liberties with the 613 commandments of G-d in His Torah. The Jewish faith for over 3,000 years has always been Orthodox Judaism (the name dates from the 19th century, when the other two gained prominence, but Orthodox Judaism is the lineal descendant of the faith given to the forefathers of the nation at Sinai).

  36. cube says:

    I’m not surprised. Many Jews are supreme liberals. I don’t know why they choose it, but they are. Go figure.

  37. Christi says:

    A post in black and white with no shades of gray. LOVE IT! Thanks Angel.

  38. ZionistYoungster says:

    Christi, that reminds me:

    Something a lot of people can’t seem to accept is that, of the shades of gray, two are black and white. I guess it ties in to the fact that the moonbats’ concept of “diversity” includes every religion and faith and worldview you can think of, except the Bible.

  39. wytammic says:

    I’ve got to get over here more often! Oh, to have more time. Great post!

  40. Angel says:


  41. Nuke's News and Views says:

    Utah allows guns on campus…

    Brent Tenney says he feels pretty safe when he goes to class at the University of Utah, but he takes no chances. He brings a loaded 9 mm semiautomatic with him every day….

  42. D. Ox says:

    The truth has a way of pushing out falsehood, given enough time…

    We can be charitable in our dealings with people, but to be charitable in our judgments of right and wrong is simply self-destructive!

    Brava, on a powerful point well-made.

  43. KKarLLmMM says:

    As always Angel, a post of absolute brilliance.
    The obvious is always present… whatever conflicts with the “just do it, if it feels good” generation. Is going to be attacked with the most recent subjective argument.The Bible “is so yesterday” it does not apply to todays living!!!
    Heaven help us, as we reach the bottom of the Slippery Slope, everything will be all #$%^& ….
    please…just point me to the Ark,(before the Flood starts) i am on line behind the animal pairs, Yes!! the 4 legged ones….

  44. Jack says:

    The Jewish Theological Seminary is a center of Conservative Judaism. Conservative Judaism, like Reform Judaism, is not considered a valid form of Judaism by Orthodox Jews,

    Orthodox Judaism happens to be the smallest of the denominations. They can say what they want but it doesn’t make it so.

  45. Street talk and opinions » The DictatorshiP of Relativism says:

    [...] Read more at Angel [...]