Moral Foundations: Why the Other Side is Crazy



Comments (5)

Comment Feed


This doesn't really "explain" anything. It suggests that the difference in our values is quite deep (something we already knew), but it does not help in exploring why or how to sort it out. In short, this is the kind of account you get when you outsource a humanities subject to social scientists.

Kevin Carnahan more than 5 years ago

What Seems Right

These foundations seem balanced and fair at first. But our human reasoning can let us down. Proverbs 14:12 says "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death." It is best to take our moral foundations from above.

Skipper Anding more than 5 years ago

Heard this before

Jonathan Haidt has done excellent research on this topic but his theory lacks critical understanding of the progressive position, Haidt basically claims liberals lack the values of authority and purity. He's wrong; we just value authority and purity of different items. For instance, by and large, we do not regard abortion so much as a sin as a tragedy, a systems failure. We find absurd the right-wing position pornography is a social ill but that a failure to recycle waste is not. We do not hesitate to act to assert authority either when it suits us. It was a liberal administration which took out Osama Bin laden, while he was irrelevant to the previous conservative administration's so-called "War on Terror" which was more concerned about protecting Saudi national friends of the First Family. "Liberty" for the conservative is more concerned with the liberty of megadonors to influence policy than that of the protestor, the journalist, and that of movements for social change. There are so many holes in conservative values you could drive an aircraft carrier through them and have room for a few armored personnel carriers as well. Not impressed.

George Nixon Shuler more than 5 years ago

You are right on!

Yours is the third article that I have read that describes how absolutely different we are. I sensed it when I monitored GC2012 and came away with the sense that the UMC was a gianourmous square raft with umpteen paddles lining each side each paddling the best way it knew how. Having spent an inordinate amount of time since then monitoring the myriad of voices that make up the UMC, I now realize that the UMC has disintegrated into nothing more than factions with conflicting understandings who are jockeying for position and power. As a result all the Bishops can do is try to smooth things over and keep the whole mess afloat!

So OK, we do not think alike. Given the progressives' total disregard for the specific structure and processes that are at the heart of how Methodists work and live together, write the article that describes how we function from this day forward as Methodists and not some nondescript church that believes nothing in particular. I for one am very weary of being part of a church that has been in a drift so long, it has no clue who it is and what it is it needs to be doing as Christians of a Methodist persuasion. Our unique message and method were lost a long time ago; without it we are doomed to suffer with ineffective leadership and constant infighting.

I have no doubt The Church will continue to thrive here in America. I am confident that Christianity with a Wesleyan accent is already regaining its American footing. But when it comes to the American branch of The United Methodist Church.... Maybe it is time to quit fighting these battles and start managing the numerical decline that has plagued all of mainline Protestant Christianity for almost 50 years and quietly fade away. The Western Jurisdiction is already proving that “progressive” Christianity is not very appealing to most rank and file people--I for one am repelled by their intolerance of those that disagree with them. This is further confirmed by other mainline Protestant churches who have gone "progressive." On the other hand, The Wesleyan Church is dealing with consistent and often record-breaking growth. The new Anglican Church of North America is gaining traction. Both are thoroughly orthodox in their beliefs. Reality is, what is stated in the BOD is the absolute and correct truth: homosexuality is incompatible with 2000+ years of Christian teaching and if you delve into our Jewish roots, the timeline goes even further. It has only been since the sexual revolution of the 1960s that Christianity has tried to put same-gender sexual relationships on the same footing as those between a man and a woman. For me to believe that there is any new enlightenment I would have to believe that humanity has evolved and is working at some higher plane of understanding. The heavy-handed actions and intolerance of “progressives” confirm my own life experiences that humanity is just as broken today as it was the day the triune God set foot on this earth in the form of Jesus Christ

Betsy more than 5 years ago

Some problems

There is no dichotomy between "Bible-believing" churches and churches which "believe nothing in particular." The churches which accept our LGBT Brothers and Sisters are doing quite well. If all you want to play is a "numbers game," the right-wing is losing big too. To believe in Christ's radical hospitality is certainly not lukewarm except to liars and reprobates who weaponized scripture out of context. Church "numbers" have always been inflated and every single church directory ever printed includes people who have not set foot on church property for years, sometimes decades. In our imperfect past, church membership was required to be considered respectable. Now it is an irrelevancy, unless you're running for Congress in a deep red district. President Lincoln never belonged to a church, yet he was definitely one of the top four at least according to Gutzon Borglum. In the only race that he won prior to becoming President his opponent was a Methodist Pastor who began their debate by asking all in the room who wanted to go to heaven to stand. The entire audience stood, but not Lincoln. The pastor sputtered, "Mr. Lincoln, don't you want to go to heaven?" Lincoln's response was, "If it is all the same to you, Reverend, I would prefer to go to Congress." He did.

I would challenge you to provide specific examples of the "intolerance" of progressives. We don't seek to exclude you, but we will not enable your bigotry. We love you but we hate your sin.

George Nixon Shuler more than 5 years ago