Who decides what’s moral and immoral? I believe that everyone has a responsibility to decide what’s good, right, & moral, and society should give people a lot of freedom to decide for themselves. Social pressures can help individuals in their efforts to live good lives, but social pressures can also lead people into destructive behavior and misconceptions. Sometimes pressures from society are just plain oppressive.
The answer to the question “Who says so?” or “Who has the authority to tell me how to live?” can be very complex, but I’ll attempt to summarize the contenders here.
Americans tend toward spirited individualism, valuing freedom above most other values. This tendency causes us to chafe against the moral authorities mentioned above, but those authorities all play a necessary role in keeping humanity from things that cause pain and suffering. We, as a people, need to constantly strive for balance with these sources of moral authority to use them for good, but as minimally as necessary to avoid abuse of authority.
That’s the condensed overview. Now let’s look at some of the complexities that cause so much confusion and quarrelling.
There are moral absolutes, independent of what society or individuals think and unchanging through time and place and circumstance. As an example, I believe it is absolutely wrong for an adult to have sexual relations with a young child. This applies to all cultures, in all places, over all times. I can’t think of an exception. Pedophiles don’t choose their sexual desires, but they must choose to resist them. To help with their struggles, governments can outlaw such actions; religious institutions can teach against them; friends and family members can condemn them; society as a whole can revile such acts, etc.
Similarly, I believe it’s absolutely wrong for crooks to take advantage of vulnerable people such as the elderly and children. Swindlers who target gullible retirees, robbing them of their life savings, should be punished. Likewise for drug traffickers who target children or human traffickers who enslave them. These things should be aggressively prosecuted and punished by governments world-wide, no exceptions, and they should be considered so shameful that even crass comedians don’t joke about them because no one finds it funny.
Those examples all have clear victims who suffer tremendously from the sin. All societal groups—government, religion, families, schools, etc., should work together in opposing such cases where relatively innocent people are victimized. In contrast to these cases, what adults do in private may have no obvious, direct victims but it can change them in a negative way, impacting others indirectly.
When the impact isn’t so obvious, the government, religious institutions, social pressure, etc., should be more tolerant. If an activity with questionable moral implications has no clear victim, the government shouldn’t discriminate against it or favor it. (I’m thinking of disputable things here like pornography, gambling, alcohol, homosexuality, violent movies, etc.) Sometimes we regulate these things to protect children, but we give adults maximum latitude.
Religious institutions can take moral stances on these activities. They can be stabilizing influences, moderating change. Religious institutions help maintain order in societies, reducing the effects of fads and fickle societal whims. They can act as a conscience, warning against excesses to keep free societies in balance without overbearing government regulation. The examples I listed in the previous paragraph can have a negative impact on society even when kept private. Pornography, for example, can influence people mentally and emotionally in ways that infiltrate society, increasing ills such as divorce, child abuse, rape, sexual coercion, and many other problems that cause pain and suffering. Governments can regulate pornography a little to reduce its impact, but religious institutions are better equipped to fight this battle, along with other moral battles where private sins can degrade society.
Families should provide the most stable, strong and detailed influences of all. They can reinforce standards of the government and religions, but families can also teach morality in areas that government and religious organizations neglect. Bonds of family loyalty should be so strong that members feel compelled to conform, but the same loyalty should keep family members embraced even if they choose to go against the family expectations. Ideally, loyalty to the family should be stronger than government, religious institution, school, or any other social group. Families are small organizations with enormous autonomy making them a great source of diversity so societies don’t become too homogeneous. Unfortunately, strong families aren’t as common in most cultures as they should be.
Society as a whole, along with subcultures within a society, can change rapidly. It’s a complex interaction of people connected to multiple influencing groups. This is where change in a culture usually gets traction and where expectations of normal behavior in the “gray areas” are usually defined.
In a perfect world, family, friends, faith, government and the rest of society all work together in harmony, motivating people to do what’s good for everyone. The reality is that they often compete and conflict with each other in the confusing gray areas of what’s morally right and good. Sometimes we need to trust our parents above all else. Sometimes we find our parents to be misguided and we might find a faith to guide us better. We must each choose our path. But what do we do when individual choices clash, creating conflict?
Most people agree with the general principle that all these sources of influence (government, religion, etc.) have a say in moral issues where the victim is clear—the black and white areas of morality. Most people even accept limited influences of these groups in gray areas. But people disagree dramatically on how tolerant or accepting society should be in specific gray areas. When dealing with these nebulous moral standards we need to be gracious and understanding toward people we disagree with.
Finally, I believe that we will ultimately be judged by our creator who has the final word on morality. That’s between every individual and God. We can all have our opinions, but there’s only one judge for the soul.