Chameleon12

From Moral Relativism to Reality Relativism
Michael Brown

For the last few decades, our culture has warmly embraced moral relativism, where right and wrong are determined based on our feelings, and so there is nothing absolute. Morality is entirely relative, which means that you can have your morality and I can have mine.

Today, we have moved from moral relativism to reality relativism, where not only morality but everything is determined by how I feel, so you can have your reality and I can have mine.

This is not a matter of a dangerous descent down a slippery slope. This is a matter of falling off the cliff entirely.

Call it reality free-fall – or perhaps, reality free-for-all, since anything goes these days.

The effects of moral relativism are obvious.

A******n may be wrong for you, but not for me.

Living together out of wedlock may be wrong for you, but not for me.

Name the sinful behavior, wh**ever it is – as long as it allegedly doesn’t hurt anyone, which also becomes a relative concept – and who are you to judge? From porn to drugs to adultery to stealing, we can find justification for our actions.

In the words of Scripture, “All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the spirit” (Proverbs 16:2).

When I was shooting heroin (1970-71) I began to hang out with junkies, and they were a very different breed than my hippie friends. (Some of the hippies wouldn’t do chemically-based drugs, since that was not “natural,” which is yet another aspect of moral relativism, but that’s another story.)

One junkie was telling me about a friend of his who was so morally bankrupt that he would steal money from his own grandmother.

I said to him, “But didn’t you tell me you stole money from your own mother?”

He replied, “Yes, I did, but I would never steal money from my grandmother!” (To my shame, I had stolen money from my own father.)

This confirms what Ravi Zacharias observed, namely, “With no fact as a referent, what is normative is purely a matter of preference.”

Well, we have taken that concept one step further today: “With no fact as a referent, what is real is purely a matter of perception.”

Who’s to say Bruce Jenner isn’t a woman. (As someone tweeted me today, “Her name is Caitlin.”)

Who’s to say Rachel Dolezal isn’t black?

Who’s to say that people suffering from species dysphoria are not actually part animal? (A technical description of this disorder is “the sense of being in the wrong [species] body... a desire to be an animal.”)

Who are you to judge?

Why must people be confined by the “g****r binary” of male-female? Why, for that matter, must they be confined by the confining boundaries of skin color, ethnicity, or even humanity? Why not transcend humanity and simply be who you really are, which means, whoever you imagine yourself to be?

I recently had a conversation with a very sweet, non-religious lesbian caller to my radio show. She insisted that g****r dysphoria (meaning, t*********r identity) was different than species dysphoria, just as others have told me that g****r dysphoria was different than Body Identity Integrity Disorder (sometimes called “amputee identity disorder,” or, more recently, being “t***sabled”), and still others have argued strongly that being t*********r is different than being “t***sracial.”

Yet all the arguments are based on perception vs. reality (with the exception of those who are born with biological or genetic a******lities), and we are simply told that Bruce Jenner really is a woman (after all, t*********r is the “t” of the L**T movement) whereas Rachel Dolezal really isn’t black. Based on what objective criteria? None.

I’m convinced that the L**T war on g****r will undermine itself, being part of the larger war on reality, and that soon enough, sanity will prevail in our society.

That being said, this is an issue I would gladly drop for now if not for the fact that it continues to shout at us day and night, calling for a response, the latest example being the outrageous interview with Rachel Dolezal on NBC’s Nightly News.

I was so grieved by her comments during the interview that I prepared a special video response, which you can watch here.

R. C. Sproul once wrote, “I do not want to drive across a bridge designed by an engineer who believed the numbers in structural stress models are relative t***hs.”

In the same way, there’s not much hope for a world in which all reality becomes relative, but when we cut ourselves off from the one true God, the ultimate source of reality, we really do lose our bearings.

A return to divine t***h – to reality – will deliver us from our delusions.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

All these "names, or titles we attach to everything is as superficial as the many different views of them as well..

Your article is right~~"Yet all the arguments are based on perception vs. reality"...This statement is the factually correct conclusion...

While I believe being one with God is my reality of a better life many here will quickly point out, God does not exist and therefore holds "no reality" to anything~~Perception is just that as well...

The definition of relativism, ie~the doctrine that knowledge, t***h, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute is the fairest summation of it all...

Live as you choose, be happy in you're reality and don't worry about what others think...In the long run we do believe as we do and no one is going to change that decision.......

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Very true. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Good morning Hemi~~Thank You....Hope your getting for a wonderful Easter............. :thumbup: :thumbup:

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Thank you so much,I hope yours is as well.

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

Dr. Michael Brown is an exceptional thinker, which is why the "progressives" H**E HIM SO MUCH
The perception that a person is male because she thinks she is male, is only part of the equation. The ultimate goal is to destroy all t***h and values because a society that believes in nothing is a society that is easily put into voluntary servitude. That is why I fight so hard when it comes to things like men in women's restrooms. It is not the actual foolish concept it is the indoctrination that it is part of the end result of that indoctrination.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

That's the problem though, just as your article points out, it not just a foolish indoctrination to those whom perceive it differently than we do..
We have taken PC over the top to where it is now the detriment!!!!!!

Sons of Liberty Loc: look behind you!

I believe in the simple things in life. I know GOD is with me everyday and I worship him in his most beautiful creation of all...the great outdoors. As my father taught me long ago...there is no church, which I do go to every Sunday, as beautiful as the great outdoors that HE created. My dad says we're in church everyday, it's just that so many don't realize the beauty that GOD created.
Happy Easter Linda...may you be blessed in all you do.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I agree with your Father..Church serves as the moral reinforcer for what my heart and spirit know of God...I go occasionally, but do not need to go to have my union with God..I can and do speak to him often enough..

The Universe he created is as beautiful as he made us..All we need do is stop, look and listen...

Happy Easter to you, Son of Liberty, a beautiful person you truly are......

Chameleon12

The problem is our beliefs are rapidly changing.

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

Chameleon12

I think you're missing the point Moral relativism is one thing(possibly dangerous) but, reality relativism is definitely dangerous.