Tag: right

A Day To Remember

What difference did the 24th make? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out.

I have a hope that someday in the future June 24th will be declared a national holiday. I would be thrilled if it was the day we began to be truly woke, in the sense of woke up from our delusions on sexuality, and began ending the war against reality. When I heard the news, I was thrilled. I was in such a good mood that for awhile, even being at work didn’t bother me.

Now in reality, this doesn’t change a lot honestly. Most Democratic states will stay exactly the same. Most Republican states will stay exactly the same. I am in Tennessee now and I am not seeing anyone going crazy over what has happened. Most people I encounter aren’t saying anything about it.

Still, I’m happy. Life is being honored and upheld. If anything, the reaction I am seeing from people on the left is further demonstrating to me that this is the right decision. For people who have been saying we need more gun control, I have seen them showing images about how a gun could solve the Roe decision and a number of my friends unfriended others who were calling for violence. (Not unheard of. Remember someone tried to assassinate Kavanaugh.)

Also, this is not done. We still need to have Right To Life marches. Even if every states becomes pro-life, we should be having the marches regularly. We must never take the right to life for granted again.

For those on the left also, I am already seeing the posts about how this decision is racist. The more you play this race card over and over, the less seriously we take it. If anything, you are promoting anything as racism which damages the cases of real racism that are out there.

Ideas are already popping up that if those of us on the right did, would be called conspiracy theories. This includes getting rid of apps that track menstrual cycles and ideas about going camping instead of going to get an abortion. The about face I find simply incredible.

Now if you do want to get abortion back through the Supreme Court, then here’s what you really do. Make a case that is stronger than Roe and stronger than Casey. The case was just not argued well.

For those of us on the right, we need to keep reminding people of the importance of life and keep being there for women who are in crisis pregnancies, like we have been consistently already. Also, we definitely need to do something about adoption laws. Adoption costs way too much which is why plenty of people are going to other countries in order to adopt.

I also think we owe a thanks to Trump and Bush both for appointing judges that do uphold the pro-life position. Also, those judges who stood their ground and voted for life are brave souls indeed. These people were facing constant protests and threats and could have easily backed down and they never once did. I don’t know how many of us could have done the same thing.

The other side is right about one thing. The battle is not over. No matter what, life should never be taken for granted. Every life is a precious gift and every life has a right to life.

For now, let’s celebrate!

In Christ,
Nick Peters
(And I affirm the virgin birth)

Book Plunge: In Search of Moral Knowledge

What do I think of R. Scott Smith’s book? Let’s talk about it on Deeper Waters.

I wish to thank IVP for providing a copy of this book for a review first off. I find the moral argument to be a highly interesting argument. Now my own variation of it is that I prefer to use the fourth way of Aquinas and have it be the argument from goodness of which morality is a subsection of that. Yet insofar as it goes, the moral argument works fine and Smith has given an impressive tour de force on this.

Smith starts off with the history of how we got to this point in understanding morality today. He starts with the Bible and what is found in both testaments. He then goes on to look at the work of Plato and Aristotle and takes us through the medieval period and then through many of the great philosophers of the Enlightenment period and beyond and even goes up to interacting with postmodern looks at morality. At this point, there can be no doubt that Smith has done his research and done it well.

Smith also seeks to be as fair as he can with those whom he is dialoguing with. He admits that he has made errors in understanding past opponents at times and tries to read their works in light of all that they are saying. Smith indeed shows impressive scholarship in the field. At this point, I do think it’s important to let the reader know that I think he will need more than a layman’s understanding of the field to get the most out of this book.

Smith in the end concludes that naturalistic theories not only do not account for moral knowledge, but that they do not account for any knowledge whatsoever. This is true in whatever case he looks at as each position begs certain questions. There is also the problem that many of them deny essences and for Smith, a physicalist explanation of the nature of man is just incapable of being able to provide knowledge. We have to have essences of some sort.

Smith then roots the knowledge that we have in God. The book ends in the last chapter with a more apologetic approach looking at various issues such as the case for the resurrection of Jesus and the problem of evil. No doubt, each of these is brief and I would have liked to have seen even more in some areas at least in terms of other works that were cited since these would be out of the field that Smith is normally writing in which is fine. There were a few points on each section that I would disagree with, but they do not detract overall as Smith does provide excellent sources still in each case, though as I said I would have liked still more.

One main problem I would have liked to have addressed that rarely is is that I do not often see a definition of good given. It is as if we assume when we get together and debate what is good and what is evil that we all know what these terms really mean. In fact, this is the first question I usually raise when I debate moral issues with someone. I agree with Smith of course that love and justice are good and that murder, rape, and torturing babies for fun is wrong. Yet when I say “X is good” what do I mean?

Still, in the end, I think Smith’s work is an excellent one that will certainly leave much food for thought. For anyone who is wanting to deal with the moral argument, mark this down as essential reading.

In Christ,
Nick Peters