The final fate of morality
Bennett Rawicki
Issue date: 11/25/08 Section: Commentary
Human history is the story of freedom. From ancient shackles to its modern day pedestal as the highest political principle, freedom has continued to advance. A relief from government coercion and abuses was dearly needed, but with no moderate end in sight, the liberty sought by many throughout history has led to unrestrained license.
The classical Greek and Roman thinkers considered humans as having one final end, an ultimate happiness through the life of virtue. To achieve this end the early governments guided every aspect of citizen life, from common meals to city-wide worship. This absolute power in the hands of government often led to abuses, and individuals rarely had the freedom to seek happiness as they wanted. Freedom needed an advocate.
John Locke proclaimed that governments should limit their overbearing role on every aspect of people's lives. He argued that governments should just concentrate on protecting rights and property and leave "care of souls" and salvation to churches. Locke's philosophy of government by consent shot at the heart of absolute monarchy and led to its demise. The belief in inherited kingship was replaced by democratic republics built upon the individual rights of the citizens. Locke won victory over despotism, but the foundations of his argument for government by consent also sounded the last call for enforcement of traditional morality.
Humans do have inalienable rights, and government has no legitimate basis besides consent, but democracies do not always lead to good societies. In Locke's time, freedom was needed to remedy gross breaches of human rights, but that process of new freedoms never stopped at a moderate point. After all of the necessary steps were taken, like abolishing slavery and expanding voting rights, traditional morality became the obstacle to greater freedom. Using the tool of individual rights, the people who objected to the criminalization of their personal moral views took their battle to the courts.
The classical Greek and Roman thinkers considered humans as having one final end, an ultimate happiness through the life of virtue. To achieve this end the early governments guided every aspect of citizen life, from common meals to city-wide worship. This absolute power in the hands of government often led to abuses, and individuals rarely had the freedom to seek happiness as they wanted. Freedom needed an advocate.
John Locke proclaimed that governments should limit their overbearing role on every aspect of people's lives. He argued that governments should just concentrate on protecting rights and property and leave "care of souls" and salvation to churches. Locke's philosophy of government by consent shot at the heart of absolute monarchy and led to its demise. The belief in inherited kingship was replaced by democratic republics built upon the individual rights of the citizens. Locke won victory over despotism, but the foundations of his argument for government by consent also sounded the last call for enforcement of traditional morality.
Humans do have inalienable rights, and government has no legitimate basis besides consent, but democracies do not always lead to good societies. In Locke's time, freedom was needed to remedy gross breaches of human rights, but that process of new freedoms never stopped at a moderate point. After all of the necessary steps were taken, like abolishing slavery and expanding voting rights, traditional morality became the obstacle to greater freedom. Using the tool of individual rights, the people who objected to the criminalization of their personal moral views took their battle to the courts.
Be the first to comment on this story