DISCUSSION/Iraq and domestic protest

[Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>]

Dear visionaries,

The role of debate in a free society is often misunderstood -- it is too 
readily assumed that people disagree simply because they are disagreeable. 
We also tend to misunderstand the corrosive effects of relativism. When 
objections are made to topless car washes -- let us say -- the whole thing 
is dismissed with a relativistic wave of the hand. "So, civilization will 
crumble because some girls took off their shirts?"

No, but civilizations do crumble because no one can give a coherent account 
of what they stand for. Nations die because a "who's to say" relativism 
cannot remain limited to small town scandals and squabbles. Who will say to 
the consistent relativist, "thus far and no farther?" And by what standard 
will he say it?

So now we are on the brink of war in Iraq -- an action I oppose. We are 
already at war on other fronts, as 9-11 and Bali show all too well. I 
support some of what we have done thus far in this war, while opposing the 
various pieces of a police state that are being assembled in the name of 
our war on terror. It has been well said that the first casualty in any war 
is truth. But the second is liberty.

But in the meantime, I would like to come to my personal request, addressed 
to all ethical relativists who have posted to this list in the past, 
whether opposed to the war or supportive of it. For the duration of the 
fighting, would you please withdraw from the public discussion of the war. 
I am not saying this to be rude -- it is just that the relativist (on his 
own terms) has nothing to contribute. I am reminded of the joke about what 
happens when you cross a JW with a Unitarian -- you get someone who knocks 
on your door for no particular reason. What do you get when you cross 
ethical relativism with peace activism? Candle smoke.

Bernard Iddings Bell put it well. "God save our fatherland from its 
enemies, and chiefly from ourselves!"

Cordially,

Douglas Wilson