OK, I know I posted on this last weekend but there is now more grist for the mill. Stripping away at the layers and piggy-backing upon Amistead's excellent thread on domestic spying:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5620211Edited to add Beetwashers thread as well where this is also being discussed:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5616762But in my humble opinion this is the theme our side's advisor's and rank and file MUST begin to spread 'cuz it gets to the core of the RW's double dealing, absolutely rotten bait and switch philosophy.
The heart of the moral/cultural relativism argument RW's and fundies make, as I understand it, is that there are basic codes of behavior that due not change in the face of changing situations, i.e. across cultures or across time in a single culture.
Hence "God made Adam and Even, not Adam and Steve. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman."
Whenever libs or progressives argue from gray areas out side of absolutes of right and wrong, the right usually crows "Slippery slope !!!!" You know. Assault weapons ban. Terri Schiavo. Pregnancy as a 9-month continuum w/ different guidelines along the way, i.e. RU-486 in first week, health of mother in final month. Note two, as per the assault weapons ban, they often fold in the constitution w/ their notions of absolutism, i.e, strict constructionism.
However, as you all are know doubt well aware, "Everything changed on 9/11." I mean, we had to torture illegal non-combatants b/c it might save lives (like this wasn't true in WWII). We have to spy on citizens in these new, dangerous times (so much for "strict constructionism", eh?). And, ultimately, well, Jesus didn't live in a post 9/11 world; we felt Saddam was a threat and pre-emptive war was needed.
Now it gets thorny, to be sure, as to how far the left should embrace moral relativism in all matters. (For example, I'd say the world should intervene in a centuries-old cultural tradition of killing off of second infant girls.)
Thankfully, however, we don't have to address the wole of this ancient philosophical debate. We just need to ***hammer the right's inherent hypocrisy*** on these issues of the moment. IMHO.
And it can be done from both ends. Next time water boarding is defended on a chat show, wouldn't you love to hear a left wing pundit say "Whoa, but that sounds like the same slippery slope you decry when it comes to de-criminalizing pot in Oregon." Or, the next time some some moran tries to argue for a boycott of companies that extends benefits to same sex partners, maybe Al Franken could retort "So when you say everything changed on 9/11, you don't really mean EVERYTHING, just a PART of everything, apparently. Please explain."