Aside, I am now going to ask any or all of my (2?) readers to hold me better accountable, to just sit down to write. My problem is not that I have little to say; it is the exact opposite. I have so much to share, maybe better for dinner parties with intimates; very transparent and honest. So even if it becomes a few bullet points on one thing, I am now stating that my blog posting will be more consistent. Or let me angle this from a different perspective and admit, i have been holding out. So…hold on. Umm…but if you know me in any way, you wont hold your breath! Lol
Everything is subject to change, which means I am horrible at debating or fantastic, because I will always be able to see it from your side. Keep this is mind.
Seriously though, this topic has been circulating in my brain for over a month, and more things keep presenting themselves under the same theme. I saw the Vince Vaughn movie, The Dilemma out of the Redbox rental. It was what i call a light flick, thought-provoking with some very conservative themes under the radar (Vaughn in a ‘Dont tread on me t-shirt’ and sitting on a park bench praying to G*d) Aside from this, the movie ponders the circumstance under which one is morally obligated to confess a truth about another person’s lie. Vaughn catches the wife of his bestfriend, the actor Kevin James, cheating. Does he tell James, how does he deal with this info??
I am not writing to say one way or the other.
I have been reflecting on the similar situations in my life though, and how under different circumstances, we have moral variations. When asked how we would respond to different circumstances, most are quick to have stalwart views. And we are even more convicted towards our friends, relatives and loved one’s. Most dont throw these people under the bus, as the saying goes. Yes, we cover for them.
As we get older, we not only become more set in our ways regarding morals and values, but we also understand the power of little white lies or simply ‘biting our tongue’ to prevent hurting some person’s feelings. There are psychological and sociological reasons for this too, mainly regarding our own survival and/or prevention from being ostracized by our peers. (that’s another post!) Again, I am not condoning one or the other.
An easy example would be our politicians with serious religious convictions, yet they sign bills that are more complementary to the majority of their constituents. Or those few jurors on the Casey Anthony trial whom wanted to punch a hole in the wall because they couldn’t convict on what they knew morally. In both cases, they are up against their own conscience.
There is no disputing the value of understanding good verses evil and the necessity of having a foundation of morals and values (religiously based or not). Each circumstance is different, and i think all adults would agree.
This should be the consideration before any zealotry or dogmatic opinion gets thrown about. It is very easy to react and judge another person.
Considering the introspection that goes into making these types of decisions, one of my personal mottos seems fitting:
Whenever there is doubt before an action, this usually means ‘no’. If there is a suspicion of a guilty conscience, this is a serious red flag. ‘Knowing’ how to respond is a confident, unwavering ‘yes’. Always stay open and honest, but hopefully not at the expense of hurting someone.
(this whole post may have no application for some of you; maybe I live my life more…dangerously 😉