The Moral Gun.

--The GiRL

You know that song -- where have all the good people gone? It leads me to wonder, would I be one of the “good people” in some of the following situations? Are there ever situations in which you should abandon goodness for safety or does goodness always come first? How far should your “goodness” go?

Working at a news station sometimes there are stories that disturb and make you ponder the difficult questions of life. Below are two stories and their echoes. 

Story 1 (true story by the way): On a quaint street in in an averaged sized town it is around 10:00 pm and a domestic disturbance occurs. One man (we’ll call him Joe) hears his neighbors (husband and wife we’ll call Bob and Mary) violently arguing in the street. Out of concern for neighbor Mary, Joe goes out to calm the situation down fearing for her safety. 

Bob tells Joe he needs to leave and this has nothing to do with him, that it is between Mary and he. Joe refuses and says he wants to help. Bob tells Joe to leave once again. Joe stays to keep the situation in check. Bob storms off into the house. A few moments later Bob comes back out with a hand gun. He shoots Joe in the foot and then shoots Joe in the head. Bob goes to jail convicted of murder.

Should Joe have left? Should Joe have called authorities? Is there something good in Joe’s actions? If this story ended differently would we suggest the same action? What does this story tell you about the moral convictions of Bob, Mary, and Joe?

Story 2 (true story as well): In the Denver International Airport a woman was being raped in a concourse. Multiple people passed by afraid to intervene or get help. Two gentleman employees walked by and saw what was happening. They wrestled the rapist to the ground and the girl was saved from further pain.

Why did others keep walking? Did the two who intervened do the right thing? If this situation had ended differently, maybe like story 1, would we have advised the workers to act in another way? What does this demonstrate about community vs. individual morality? How would you have responded?

Story 3 (true story as well): Yesterday a man was hit by a car and left in a ditch when the unknown driver took off. The first person to do anything about it was a police officer. 

Of all the people in a town, how come a police officer (how many police are in a city?) was the first to respond -- where were all the other people who passed by? 

The new situational mantra: “This is not our business, let’s just leave it alone.”

The new situational mantra is becoming increasingly common. I think the phrase also represents a lot about our society. First, we doubt that strangers will respond appropriately to our moral convictions about situations. Second, if it’s not me then it doesn’t matter. Third, we’re ill prepared for the worst.

Regarding the first: we doubt strangers will respond appropriately to our moral convictions in situations.

There has become a dramatic difference between individuals and their beliefs about right and wrong. Right and wrong are determined by the individual and society has trained itself to avoid imposing personal convictions on another. The extremity of this cultural development is reflected in the situational mantra. Sadly, not only does this mantra reflect the depravity of community in our society, it also, combined with the stories detailed earlier, represents the real life dangers of leaving everyone to be their own person. When there is no common morality and no common justice, then we leave people to only do as they please. What then do you do when what they please is to eliminate you? You fall victim to society’s moral depravity. Without the ability to see right and wrong and step in when needed, we continue the cycle of violence. Our community morality has degraded and unfortunately if we continue to let it degrade there will be more victims.

Regarding the second: If it’s not me, then it doesn’t matter.

As mentioned in my first, we need to remember that it may not be you, but it could be you...or your bother, mother, father, sister, friend, cousin, and the list goes on. As more and more people ignore injustice we subject all those we love to fall prey to violence. 

Regarding the third: we’re ill prepared for the worst.

We’re trained what to do in a fire, a tornado, a hurricane or an earthquake but how often are we trained to handle dangerous situations involving others? I suggest thinking about how you would respond in not only an emergency but also when your moral convictions are challenged. What do you do when you see your boss doing something illegal? What do you do when you see one employee as the office scape goat? How would you respond if someone was screaming for help?

Think about what is important and how you can respond. Sometimes it is the preparation ahead of time that can mean a happy ending or a violent ending.

As a last note -- it has been the human failure to reflect on how one would respond when moral convictions are challenged. This failure has led to hurt individuals and as a result specifically in the United States possibly the degradation of our society. 

We are afraid to intervene when our moral convictions are subject to scrutiny because many of us have interacted with people who inappropriately handled their moral convictions. It is easy to blanket your moral convictions on other people, but if you lose reflection and preparedness with your convictions there can be victims you leave behind.

Think about how to respond appropriately when you are challenging someone else’s “failed” morality and when your own personal “failed” morality is challenged by someone else who believes contrary to you. 

Be open to discussion and change while maintaining the freedom to live united with your convictions.

 Avoid using that moral gun to get rid of another who does not think the same as you.