I usually don’t watch the news but last week I couldn’t stay away from the “Anthony Weiner for Mayor” story as it exposed issues of sexting and extra marital affairs. Even mainstream secular news outlets seemed disgusted by a man who cheated on his wife repeatedly and sent nude pictures of himself to other women. I was intrigued by the news coverage. Why do those holding subjective, secular worldview believe Weiner did something wrong?
Most of the secular folk’s I have talked to tell me that they think it’s only a big deal because Weiner’s running for Mayor. I think that may be an easy way to side step the issue but it doesn’t really address the moral objections related to his behavior. It has been hard for me to find someone who is willing to say Weiner’s behavior would be objectionable even if he wasn’t running for Mayor (at least with a straight face).
Where do these commonly recognized moral absolutes come from? Why do all of us accept that you cannot be a liar and a cheater unless you are of very low character? I know as a Christian this seems like common sense. But to suggest that God is the source of objective moral truth is a bridge to far for some who push God away. What if we examined Weiner’s behavior within a worldview where there are no objective morals?
Take for instance Weiner’s extra marital affairs. His wife got onto a podium last week and announced that she knows about the affairs, he knows they were wrong, and that this issue is between her and her husband. For the secular worldview this should be enough right? If marriage is nothing more than a legal contract between two people and the government for the purposes of filing taxes, why should we object to the behavior? Weiner didn’t do anything illegal and no one got hurt, so why should he be judged for his private behavior?
What about the sexting, if you have a secular worldview, the fact this man sent pictures of himself naked to another women should be fine. There is nothing illegal, no one got hurt, and after all, his wife knows about it and forgave him. Perhaps Weiner is more culturally enlightened than we are and we all need to do some self-assessment on our intolerant behavior.
It is pretty obvious that a subjective moral worldview collapses on itself here, which should give us a clue on its reliability. The Weiner Scandal has been a pretty good example of objective moral truth “in the wild”. I think we would be hard pressed to find someone with a secular worldview that could give us a solid explanation of why Weiner’s behavior was wrong if all moral claims are subjective. Those who hold a secular worldview need to ask themselves: If marriage is open to interpretation in the courtroom, than why is it not open to interpretation in the household? If the sexting aspect of this story seems “icky” (and I hope it does), why is this so?
also, follow Jassen at;