Do Family Values Equal Intolerance?

I thought that I would write a follow up to my previous blog. Not necessarily on the thievery act but on the term moral. I recently watched an episode of Boston Legal in which one of the characters said something rather profound. In a discussion between himself and a colleague they were talking about things they wish they could rid the world of. He said that he wished he could get rid the world of people who use the term family values as a veil for intolerance. For instance, “I am upholding family values by not allowing homosexuals to marry.” I won’t go off on my diatribe about that; however I think the same concept applies to morality.

Often time’s people use the term moral as a justification or excuse for bad behavior (intolerance, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness). I hate it when people say that (anything) is immoral. Why is it immoral? Most of the time there is not a valid logical argument for it being immoral. Moral is not so easily defined. The term itself is a shroud of ambiguity. One’s views on morality and values stem’s from where they sit in life and there is no set rule of what is moral and what is not. What might be considered immoral in Utah may be perfectly acceptable in New York or some other part of the world.

People should not cower behind terms such as morals and values to justify their belief. If they truly believe it then why do they place a veil on their opinion? Could it be because they know that without such terms their opinions would seem rather petty and illogical? If their opinions and beliefs are not petty then they would not need such terms to prove their arguments. Thus the term morality in my mind should be used with precaution as to not fall into the realms of shadowing justification for ones actions and thoughts. If you believe something to be true then just say it and don't use an excuse!