Reality and Political Correctness
Posted: 3rd October, 2011
By Fikayo Adeyemo
Administrator
Administrator
Truth is correct knowledge about reality. Whatever is real is true,
although its existence and characteristics may not be fully known to
everyone. Yet the veracity of the characteristics does not depend on
its apprehension by people but on its sheer being. Therefore, truth
is singular and not about options. If two positions disagree on an
issue, it is either one is right and the other is wrong, or both are
wrong.
Political Correctness
Today, the world wants us to operate in political correctness. But
our question must be "What is political correctness?" From an
initial deceptively simple definition of "intentionally avoiding
offence", the concept has moved through prescription of the
elements of this new morality to the current situation where we are
now faced with government-promoted coercion into an
authoritarian system united only by a hatred for Christianity
specifically, and things of God in general. For instance, it is now
politically correct to hold discussions and teaching on evolution in
the privacy of one's home but, as the City officials in San Juan
Capistrano, California would sternly warn us, it is not permitted to
teach the Bible to some friends and associates in the privacy of
your home without obtaining a required licence - which has been
made suitably difficult to obtain.
Absolutes and Divisiveness
It is not surprising for political correctness, which preaches moral
relativism, to be so much averse to Christianity and her absolutist
stand on morality. It is claimed that absolutes engender
divisiveness and political correctness will overcome such
divisiveness by permitting each person to do whatever feels good
in his sight - provided he does so without offending the
"sensibilities" of other people. Even on the surface, such a system
is patently dangerous - but what is even more ominous is the fact
that the implementation, apart from being consciously skewed
against Christian teachings, is also skewed in favour of evil and to
the detriment of justice. It is under political correctness, for
example that the burglar has "rights" to be protected even during
the course of violating the rights of the victim of burglary. And now,
it's the kids that have all the rights in the home while the parents
must forget about their right, nay, responsibility, to firmly bring up
their offspring. Under political correctness, the government
imagines that it can usurp this duty. The recent UK youth rampage
is a tiny speck of the kind of repercussions to expect from a
generation of children whose parents have become "big
government".
Natural versus Contrived Systems
In the final analysis, the issue is between reality and fantasy.
Nature has been created to have a "natural" way of progressing.
Sort of in-built dynamics. Individually and as a whole, these things
constitute not only what is, but also what can be. Reality now, and
in the making. Now, over the course of human history, many
persons have entertained ideas that reality can be artificially
constructed, outside of nature. Typically, the proponents of such
ideas were either intoxicated by their endowments (money, power,
academic knowledge, etc. ) or they were just plain mad. To be
sure, early successes were almost always recorded for various
durations, but eventually, nature always played the last joker. So, it
was with the trans-atlantic slavery, so it was with all forms of
colonialism, so it was with Marxism, so it was with apartheid, so it
was with Arab totalitarian regimes, so it was with the nigger era in
the US, and so it will be with political correctness. Any novelty,
however intellectually beautiful we may think it is, can not lead to
lasting human progress except if it follows genuine natural
attitudes and preferences of humanity. Government and the
media may have a role in supervision and maybe even a measure
of modulation (as we have seen repeatedly with successful
capitalist economic system) but never as the almost totalitarian
policeman it is trying to be now concerning political correctness. It
has been correctly remarked therefore that "politically correct people can't stand reality or see that things have evolved to be as they are for good reasons" (Political Correctness: the awful truth).
Government Partisanship
They admonish us not to be "divisive" through holding on to the
values we believe in and cherish. So, if an atheist evolutionist is
offended by my faith in Christ, the solution is not just that I should
refrain from preaching to him, but also that I should stop practicing
Christianity altogether, or at least in ways that nobody would even
associate me with the faith. Meanwhile, the atheist, is absolutely
free to preach his humanist religion wide, far and loud, and for
good measure, top it with a campaign that anything "Christian"
should be banned from the school MY (not his) children attend. I
think justice is sorely missing here. Government has become
partisan, and the media is busy playing to the gallery. Therefore,
their admonition may only be tolerated where the issues involved
are themselves relative and inherently value-neutral, such as race,
preferences of clothing, language, career, etc. provided that the
implementation of even these so-called neutral options does not
raise moral questions (such as lewd dressing or a career in
stealing) and/or promote falsehood (such as claiming
homosexuality is normal).
Truth must be upheld
Wherever truth is concerned, there must be total disdain for
political correctness. We must never forget that truth can only
cause divisiveness in the presence of error. Where there is no
error, it is truth, not political correctness, that engenders peace and
unity. To submit to political correctness in the presence of error is
to both do damage to one's soul and further push the society along
the path of its self destruction. (Of course, I know that many of the
people pushing political correctness do not even believe that man
has something called soul.)
Absolutes Remain
Political correctness is partly a fruit of the attempt to borrow the
principle of relativity from physics and brutally force it on social
values and mores. What has worked excellently for inanimate
matter cannot be directly applicable to conscious beings, whether
temporal or eternal. In physics, all things may be subjected to
relativity, but in biology, sociology and anthropology, there are both
absolutes and relatives. Therefore, concerning relative things, our
attitude should be "open hands" in tolerance and cooperation, but
concerning absolutes, the only valid response must be unyielding
clenched fists, else the society faces damnation.
If you are a believer, I encourage you to hold on to the Truth, who is
Jesus Christ our Saviour, and not be swayed by the vast popularity
of "another doctrine" born out of desire to appease the god of this
world through political correctness. To them, there are no more
absolutes, no more standards. Each person or generation can
proclaim anything - and any such thing is "right" once the doers are
okay by it. Goodness is thus redefined as whatever each person
sees as good for him. Needless to say, such existentialist attitude
is a recipe for chaos and failure of the race - not to talk of being a
sin in the sight of the Creator.
If you are not a believer, I urge you to reconsider your position and
give attention to the absolute words of the Scripture that says, "I am
the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except
through Me" (John 14:6).
God bless you.
although its existence and characteristics may not be fully known to
everyone. Yet the veracity of the characteristics does not depend on
its apprehension by people but on its sheer being. Therefore, truth
is singular and not about options. If two positions disagree on an
issue, it is either one is right and the other is wrong, or both are
wrong.
Political Correctness
Today, the world wants us to operate in political correctness. But
our question must be "What is political correctness?" From an
initial deceptively simple definition of "intentionally avoiding
offence", the concept has moved through prescription of the
elements of this new morality to the current situation where we are
now faced with government-promoted coercion into an
authoritarian system united only by a hatred for Christianity
specifically, and things of God in general. For instance, it is now
politically correct to hold discussions and teaching on evolution in
the privacy of one's home but, as the City officials in San Juan
Capistrano, California would sternly warn us, it is not permitted to
teach the Bible to some friends and associates in the privacy of
your home without obtaining a required licence - which has been
made suitably difficult to obtain.
Absolutes and Divisiveness
It is not surprising for political correctness, which preaches moral
relativism, to be so much averse to Christianity and her absolutist
stand on morality. It is claimed that absolutes engender
divisiveness and political correctness will overcome such
divisiveness by permitting each person to do whatever feels good
in his sight - provided he does so without offending the
"sensibilities" of other people. Even on the surface, such a system
is patently dangerous - but what is even more ominous is the fact
that the implementation, apart from being consciously skewed
against Christian teachings, is also skewed in favour of evil and to
the detriment of justice. It is under political correctness, for
example that the burglar has "rights" to be protected even during
the course of violating the rights of the victim of burglary. And now,
it's the kids that have all the rights in the home while the parents
must forget about their right, nay, responsibility, to firmly bring up
their offspring. Under political correctness, the government
imagines that it can usurp this duty. The recent UK youth rampage
is a tiny speck of the kind of repercussions to expect from a
generation of children whose parents have become "big
government".
Natural versus Contrived Systems
In the final analysis, the issue is between reality and fantasy.
Nature has been created to have a "natural" way of progressing.
Sort of in-built dynamics. Individually and as a whole, these things
constitute not only what is, but also what can be. Reality now, and
in the making. Now, over the course of human history, many
persons have entertained ideas that reality can be artificially
constructed, outside of nature. Typically, the proponents of such
ideas were either intoxicated by their endowments (money, power,
academic knowledge, etc. ) or they were just plain mad. To be
sure, early successes were almost always recorded for various
durations, but eventually, nature always played the last joker. So, it
was with the trans-atlantic slavery, so it was with all forms of
colonialism, so it was with Marxism, so it was with apartheid, so it
was with Arab totalitarian regimes, so it was with the nigger era in
the US, and so it will be with political correctness. Any novelty,
however intellectually beautiful we may think it is, can not lead to
lasting human progress except if it follows genuine natural
attitudes and preferences of humanity. Government and the
media may have a role in supervision and maybe even a measure
of modulation (as we have seen repeatedly with successful
capitalist economic system) but never as the almost totalitarian
policeman it is trying to be now concerning political correctness. It
has been correctly remarked therefore that "politically correct people can't stand reality or see that things have evolved to be as they are for good reasons" (Political Correctness: the awful truth).
Government Partisanship
They admonish us not to be "divisive" through holding on to the
values we believe in and cherish. So, if an atheist evolutionist is
offended by my faith in Christ, the solution is not just that I should
refrain from preaching to him, but also that I should stop practicing
Christianity altogether, or at least in ways that nobody would even
associate me with the faith. Meanwhile, the atheist, is absolutely
free to preach his humanist religion wide, far and loud, and for
good measure, top it with a campaign that anything "Christian"
should be banned from the school MY (not his) children attend. I
think justice is sorely missing here. Government has become
partisan, and the media is busy playing to the gallery. Therefore,
their admonition may only be tolerated where the issues involved
are themselves relative and inherently value-neutral, such as race,
preferences of clothing, language, career, etc. provided that the
implementation of even these so-called neutral options does not
raise moral questions (such as lewd dressing or a career in
stealing) and/or promote falsehood (such as claiming
homosexuality is normal).
Truth must be upheld
Wherever truth is concerned, there must be total disdain for
political correctness. We must never forget that truth can only
cause divisiveness in the presence of error. Where there is no
error, it is truth, not political correctness, that engenders peace and
unity. To submit to political correctness in the presence of error is
to both do damage to one's soul and further push the society along
the path of its self destruction. (Of course, I know that many of the
people pushing political correctness do not even believe that man
has something called soul.)
Absolutes Remain
Political correctness is partly a fruit of the attempt to borrow the
principle of relativity from physics and brutally force it on social
values and mores. What has worked excellently for inanimate
matter cannot be directly applicable to conscious beings, whether
temporal or eternal. In physics, all things may be subjected to
relativity, but in biology, sociology and anthropology, there are both
absolutes and relatives. Therefore, concerning relative things, our
attitude should be "open hands" in tolerance and cooperation, but
concerning absolutes, the only valid response must be unyielding
clenched fists, else the society faces damnation.
If you are a believer, I encourage you to hold on to the Truth, who is
Jesus Christ our Saviour, and not be swayed by the vast popularity
of "another doctrine" born out of desire to appease the god of this
world through political correctness. To them, there are no more
absolutes, no more standards. Each person or generation can
proclaim anything - and any such thing is "right" once the doers are
okay by it. Goodness is thus redefined as whatever each person
sees as good for him. Needless to say, such existentialist attitude
is a recipe for chaos and failure of the race - not to talk of being a
sin in the sight of the Creator.
If you are not a believer, I urge you to reconsider your position and
give attention to the absolute words of the Scripture that says, "I am
the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except
through Me" (John 14:6).
God bless you.
| Fikayo Adeyemo |
| . |
| ORG |
UPHOLDING THE NEW COVENANT PERSPECTIVE ON LIFE
|
Join us in this exciting biblical exposition series Genesis 1: 1 |
|
| ALL THE ARTICLES |
HTML Comment Box is loading comments...
| Copyright Fikayo Adeyemo, 2010-2012 |
Current user is:
| not signed in |
| Hey! Jesus calls you, NOW! Have you ever accepted Jesus as your Lord and Saviour? We were all born with the sinful nature of Adam which God cannot fellowship with. The Good News is that God therefore gave Jesus to us to redeem the situation. It is only by receiving this provision of God that you can have spiritual salvation and enjoy eternity in heaven with God. I implore you to allow Jesus into your life now. Yield yourself to Him. Stop the struggle and religious debates. While he who is spiritually saved will enter into the Kingdom of God (which is commonly seen as the Christian faith), this is not a call to the Christian “religion”, but a call to the salvation of your soul. For no religion can save – not even Christianity as a religion. So, being born into a Christian family or going to church or mosque, or trying to live a devout life will not save you. Whatever your religion, whatever moral standing you have, you must repent of your sins and personally receive Jesus into your life. So, now, Jesus is calling you one more time. What shall your response be? |
