Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gemma Mason's avatar

What is your position on women’s equality within the church? It seems strange to claim that Christianity is the best basis for women’s equality when churches are perhaps the strongest proponents of the view that women are ideally not equal to men and the church, in particular, is one of the main places where women should not be equal.

As regards racial or economic justice, I think we should note that white and black, or rich and poor, do not need to be equally morally culpable for social injustice in order for us to see both groups as possessing human dignity and human flaws. The Bible is pretty clear that rich people are likely to be in a dire spiritual condition; it’s almost impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Clearly, if we’re using the Bible as our moral example, it is not wrong to point the finger at rich people in particular for certain kinds of sin. The phrase “moral equality” could be taken to imply otherwise, and I think some of your wording does fall into that trap.

Expand full comment
Justin D's avatar

Excellent speech.

"I would have thought that the proper response to rejecting the racial right would be to reject that premise. Instead, the cultural left has assumed the truth of that premise and banked their moral worldview on a falsifiable empirical claim: That human beings, in a utopian, newly-reconstituted Rousseauian state of nature, would have equal group averages on accidental features."

My own theory is that social scientists went strongly in this direction after WW2 because they had no answer why, in a new post-Christian morality, groups should be treated equally if they are inherently different. And frankly, they still don't. They could have been working on this issue for decades, but instead their only argument is that all groups should be treated equally because they are indeed 100% biologically equal. Now they are painted into a corner.

The best path forward is what you suggested:

"We need a moral doctrine that is a substantive alternative to that of proponents of DEI. And that doctrine should retain an “E.” The E should not be understood as implying a mathematical equality between groups, but a moral equality across races as members of the human species, as people."

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts