COLUMN: Media show worldwide moral decline

OK, folks, time to move on. Nothing to see here. Train wreck is over. Move along. People think differently. We get that... it's old news now.

While I disagree with much of this thing, I admire Winters for the use of his own name. Whether he's right or wrong, at least he thinks he's worthy of his own opinions.

But we ought, he thinks, to agree with him before the conversation has begun. After presupposing its own moral righteousness, the article prods its finger in my chest, stamps its feet, pulls its hair, stomps on its hat, and then stammers drunkenly down the street.

The message? Just don't get in my way.

Kudos to you for having an opinion and being willing to share it, Richard. Learn to back it up. While I don't agree with a single thing you've said here, I respect your right to have an opinion. You seem to have strong emotional ties to this argument, yet no logical ones. If you're going to insist on putting our opinion out there, as I think everyone should, learn to do it in a logical, meaningful manner. I also beg you to take your own advice. "Common sense cries out for people who are willing give of their time and energy to help others and to love their neighbor. Common sense begs us not to let immorality become the norm. Common sense pleads for good people everywhere to make a difference: people like you. Make the difference." Learn to love your neighbor, just because they may not agree with you, does not mean that they are wrong or deserve your hatred, as your spewing above, love your neighbor for who they are and what they stand for. If you're going to say immorality is the norm, define what is immoral, because I can guarantee you that your definition is not the same as mine, nor the same as the next person's. Perhaps you should realize that just because you believe it doesn't mean everyone does or should. I want to take your advice and make a difference in the world. I want to make a difference with you. I want you, Richard, to understand that while your opinions are valid, they do not give you the right to push them onto someone else. Nor do they give you the right to judge someone else's actions. We are all given our free agency to choose what we believe to be moral and to follow it. It is not your place to judge another human, only God can do that. So please do God a favor and stop insulting him by trying to do his job for him.

I can at least be grateful to the Statesman for taking part in the fine legacy of freedom of the press, if nothing else than for the fact that it places my enemies in plain view. And I do mean enemy. By its very nature, Mr. Winters' article stands as a trespass against the very concept of human dignity, and it seems rather convenient that he should arrive at such views by means of some of the most glaring and unmistakable instances of non-sequitur logic I have ever had the misfortune of witnessing in another human's written thought. It is nearly impossible to propose a rebuttal for each and every one of the fallacies exhibited in this article in any composed and digestible format, but I shall do my best. Mr. Winters asks "can you imagine...?" whether some of the views and values espoused in the Statesman were considered norms of society. Perhaps not- it would be a radically different society than that in which we now live. What I can imagine is a society in which the moral values of one faction are not imposed by force of consensus upon those who take issue with it- as is allowed them under the founding documents of this nation so long as their own pursuit of happiness does not in some way infringe upon the safety or freedom of their countrymen. I could otherwise, perhaps, imagine Mr. Winters' deep moral indignation arising from some legitimate source if it were informed by even the slightest modicum of rational thought. But it is not. Mr Winters would have me believe that sexual promiscuity and homosexuality prompted the downfall of Rome and Pompeii. I, in turn, find it beyond the furthest capability of my intellect to grasp how such absurd arguments could be recycled and- even more baffling- how such beliefs could possibly be accepted by a functional brain. Leaving aside the fact that Pompeii was destroyed by a volcanic eruption, a quantification of the fall of one of history's most complex, successful, and influential civilizations to a matter of sexual practices is beyond belief. It ignores, for example, the fast financial quandaries that accumulated as an effect of managing an intercontinental empire. It further ignores the continuous rise of the ancient powers who by their envy labored to usurp the glory and wealth of Rome. And it neglects even marginal consideration of the fact that the single greatest fracture in Roman infrastructure came as a result of power disputes prompted by the adoption of Christianity as the state religion. Even so, for the sake of argument I will entertain the possibility. In turn, I will ask how Greece (Macedon, if we must be technical) managed to advance its cultural ideals and the boundaries of its empire from the Balkans to Egypt, Persia, and India in a space of decades while valuing homosexual love on equal- even superior- terms as it did with heterosexual love. I defy Mr. Winters to explain away the absolutely crucial cultural legacy of Greece on such terms.And as a final word on the logical inconsistency of Mr Winters' assertions, I must ask on what grounds he concluded that accepting homosexual practices as an element of society entails the extinction of our species. Is that to say that acknowledging their right to exist and live freely means that no man and no woman shall ever again lay together and procreate? That our natural state is to seek after the same sex and that only our moral templates obligate us to members of the opposite sex? This is not common sense, this is palpably ridiculous, and Mr Winters should be ashamed for having supposed it as a valid argument. But while being demonstrably illogical, I consider Mr. Winters claims to be extremely dangerous to the pursuits of civilization and humanism. I very seriously doubt whether Mr. Winters considered the fact that the Third Reich- one of the blackest and most chilling installments in human history- took a moral stand on these very issues. I doubt whether he knew that Weimar Germany was one of the most culturally and sexually flexible instances in the European legacy, and whether he knew that it was Hitler's disgust at pornography and homosexuality that prompted him to imprison and exterminate their practitioners wholesale (an accommodation also extended to the mentally ill). While the Third Reich did not subsist wholly on such ideologies, and while Mr. Winters thankfully does not endorse such measures, the correlation is apparent in both narratives, as both actively devalue the worth of humans whose sense of morality is not congruent with their own. Such absolutist evaluations of morality remain with us today, and continue to exert their atrocious aims upon the human race. One must look no further than Iran, under whose law women have been degraded and abused beyond a conscientious mind's capacity to stomach. So too has it victimized homosexuals, political dissidents, and Zoroastrians to the point of imprisonment, execution, and exile. In such a way has Christianity also been convicted of grievous...

I disagree with your general conclusion here. People talk about how "bad" things are getting -- but the truth is, premarital sex, rape, and violence have been around since the dawn of man. Nowadays we just have more people and more media exposure to it all. I think you're comparing "now" to maybe the 50s -- a time when people were decent, and did immoral things in private.
Sexual immorality is not what caused the downfall of Rome and Pompeii, and it won't be the downfall of our society. I'm not promoting promiscuity or James Bond movies here. I just think corruption, greed, apathy, disregard for the environment, hate, intolerance etc... these things are what we really need to watch out for.
You say: "Common sense cries out for people who are willing give of their time and energy to help others and to love their neighbor." Yep. I agree with you there. But I disagree common sense does not mean we should be watchdogs of sin, calling out our neighbors for being too gay or for sexing it up.

["Interestingly enough, if you track the rise and fall of Rome, Pompeii or any other major civilization in history, sexual promiscuity and homosexuality do become the norm right before they destroy themselves. Why, then, should we embrace it?"]
I feel like you yourself have not studied this yourself. Did you just hear it one day? Something however that was accepted by Rome a lot closer to the end of Rome, relative to its long history, was Christianity. I do not blame Christianity for the fall of Rome. I blame government mismanagement and uncontrolled growth. I agree that there is a lot of violence and a lot of disrespect of people in general in entertainment media. I am grateful for your opinion I just wish it was a little bit more studied.

Gone are the days where Blacks worked for free. Gone are the days where woman were subservient to men. Gone are the days where we could displace the Native peoples and take their land for our benefit. (I am being sarcastic if you did not pick that up)

Once upon a time, in the United States' history this was the NORM. Immorality was used to distinguish people who were different from and treat them as such. I am not sure of where you think that the United States has been the most moral nation in the world, or that our morals are somewhat better than others. From your standard, one could theoretically argue that Iran has the highest standards of morality. Women are not aloud to be scandalous nor wear anything provocative, homosexually is strictly forbidden, and pornography is not exemplified in the media. But is this how a society should function?

I am not sure how you define immorality as well. How does an individual's private actions make them immoral when it is their choice has nothing to do with how society functions? I think you misconstrue arguments by saying that homosexuality or looking at pornography should be the norm, with people advocating acceptance and tolerance and not the ostracization of individuals who you believe to engage in immoral activities.

I mean, how is an individual who is a homosexual who helps their community and promote tolerance immoral? Has this to do with a religious base argument? If so, why should religious organizations dictate immorality against certain groups of people and not all individuals who are immoral? Is a a CEO of a corporation that exploits children and women in non-developed countries immoral? Is a person who overindulges in material things immoral because they do not give all they have to charity?

You make an argument about Ted and the effects of pornography, could it possible be that he was mentally ill? I mean, how often has religions caused war and destruction and the mutilation of individuals? Does this make religion immoral, or no because they do it in the name of a higher being? (Note: I do not criticize religion I do frequent services so do not take this out of context)

While do you do have the right to state YOUR OPINION, your choice of words calling other peoples ideas full of debauchery and filth without justification is what people criticize. Why is it that peoples individuals actions somehow make them "immoral?" Why is it acceptable to treat them as such? While I do not advocate people that people should be homosexuals, or that they watch pornography or that they be risque, I do advocate tolerance. Why should we say that a homosexual is the moral equivalent to Ted Bundy? It makes no sense to do so.

What a load of nonsense.

The author begins by making the presumption that homosexuality is immoral, which is a rather bold assertion which goes unsubstantiated. We do not all draw our morals from an idealized fantastical interpretation of the 1950s, Mr. Winters. Where you see increased homosexuality, I see a society growing more tolerant of a subset of humanity that has been reviled for generations. It gives me hope.

He continues by pointing out 'increased promiscuity' in the media, again positing a claim without any evidence or basis other than what he perceives measured against his own personal moral yardstick. He sees moral decay in our increased use of pornography, premarital sex, and the increased prominence of a concept so terrifying he has to render it in scare-quotes: "women's rights."

It may be a comforting narrative to think that we were once a bastion of morals and fortitude, and that society is careening toward an apocalyptic end on a slide greased with the lube of the promiscuous masses. It may fit the narrative of your particular holy book of choice. You may see yourself as a champion of the old guard, a defender of the faith, and an upstanding representation of what we ought to be. I am afraid that your narrative is wrong.

By nearly every metric we have, the society we live in is currently less evil and degraded than it ever has been.

As for pornography, while Mr. Winters pulls out the single data point of the lunatic Ted Bundy, the evidence seems to indicate that increased access to pornography actually decreases sexual violence.

I have to ask, though, Mr. Winters. If you encountered conclusive proof that the world is getting less evil, people are happier and treated better than ever, and that pornography actually reduces sexual violence, could you accept that the world might actually be getting better, or does that so strongly conflict with your internal narrative that you would reject it out of hand?

Wow.
I also, "disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
But I MUST speak out against such blatant, spiteful, arrogant, ignorance.
Your sad, narrow, view of the world and the supposed cause and effect of social norms are disturbingly oversimplified, childish and disconnected with reality. Perhaps its time to go out into the real world and examine some of these "horrors" of sex, homosexuals, heroes, and perhaps actual women, first hand.
You have demonstrated your complete lack of understanding of history, culture, homosexuality, or sexuality.
You have set the bar for the most astounding level of not knowing a damn thing about the world.
God save your ignorant little soul.
I pray you get laid, or if not, watch some porn, make some gay friends, talk to girls about how THEY feel about laws regarding their bodies, and the cultural norms, and read a book other than the Bible, soon. Or I fear you, yourself, will turn out a serial killer....(Did you actually YouTube "Ted Bundy's last interview"?!?! ... need I say more?)
Amen.

P.S. Pompeii didnt have a rampant homosexuality problem, it had a rampant LAVA problem. Im pretty sure the fall of the Roman Empire had more to do with the over-extended military campaigns which drained the national economy, exposing massive government corruption and to cover this up, the citizens needed more obscene entertainment, (like crucifying Christians for fun. See: Gladiator (2000)), and the consequence of this quest to maintain global military dominance and power, caused the Roman Empire to fall... and "Great" Britain... and now, America.