Spineless milksops are outraged at Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty over the most profound thing he may have ever said.
At a prayer breakfast in Florida, the backwoodsman took direct aim at the ethical bankruptcy of moral relativism.
In the example, Robertson postulated an atheist family where not only are the daughters raped, the wife decapitated, and the father threatened with bodily mutilation but where the Nietzschean assailants revel philosophically in their debauchery in light of the possibility that there is no transcendent standard by which these actions could be categorized as wrong.
Media elites such as those at the Huffington Post are insisting that Robertson’s remarks are part of a bizarre and disturbing fantasy.
However, the elaborated scenario is not that markedly different than what is taking place across vast swathes of Islamist controlled territory.
And if all there is is what transpires in the realm of physical matter, on what grounds does civilization stand against these kinds of atrocities?
By the moral vision and worldview of ISIS, it is perfectly acceptable to not only brutally eliminate the infidel but to enjoy carnally defiling the women of the targeted population while engaged in such genocide.
The atheist views human kind as little more than an animal.
In nature, all that matters is continued survival, the propagation of your particular genetic line, and your own pleasure.
It is not unheard of for members of a particular species to inflict all manner of what would be categorized as violence by polite society upon their own kind in pursuit of these particular goals.
Others will insist that, even if Phil Robertson is correct in his observations, he needs to be sensitive that his verbal formulations might unsettle a number of those in the listening or viewing audience, particularly liberal females.
Interesting how these very same marms that don’t want Phil Robertson heinously describing heinous acts certainly didn’t mind plopping down their money at the bookstore or cinema for “Fifty Shades Of Grey”.
Others certainly don’t mind overlooking the violence utilized as a literary device by Stephen King, especially if as part of a narrative for the purposes of making traditional religion look bad.
The cultural and moral relativism the Duck Commander warned about in his prayer breakfast homily is a nefarious and manipulative thing.
Under it’s rubric, we are obligated to not only refrain from criticizing but must also enthusiastically applaud balladeers from the ghetto celebrating all manner of crime and debauchery.
Educated effetes in metropolises such as New York and Los Angeles might not be accustomed to the plainspokeness of rural elocutes.
However, by the same standard such elites impose under threat of ruination for those failing to abide by it, if they are not members of Phil Robertson’s culture and demographic, who are they to impose their values upon despised White Christian Southerners?
By Frederick Meekins