Whose morality do we follow?

BELFAST, Northern Ireland—In a recent interview for the BBC2 series Inside Obama’s White House, President Obama sounded wistful as he spoke to an interviewer about how he has tried to use his voice “to move things toward a more ethical and moral outcome.”

Those may be fine­-sounding words, but in our day they are without meaning, because there’s no consensus as to what’s moral and what isn’t.

Morality today is personal. It is not a standard to which one is encouraged to conform for one’s own, or society’s benefit. Rather, it is about what makes one feel good. Any “moral code,” if we can call it that, exists only for the individual.

Of course, some people say a society’s laws create morality, but that is simply to anchor morality to a “majority vote.” We once had laws, remember, that allowed racial discrimination and slavery. But no human laws could make such things moral. Morality must come from beyond us.

Today’s moral relativism has contributed to a host of societal and relational problems few wish to acknowledge. To do so would force people to admit their “standard,” which in reality is no standard at all, isn’t working. And such an acknowledgement could lead to what theologians call “repentance,” a turning away from the old and embracing the new, which in this case is not new at all, but that which is old, tried, and proven best.

Barack Obama may be the most pro-abortion president America has ever had. He refuses to reduce their numbers, now approaching 60 million in the United States since 1973, not even for babies who are fully formed and minutes from delivery. By what standard is his position “moral”? The president used to be against same-sex marriage, now he’s for it. Was he moral when he opposed it, or is he moral now that he supports it? And what is his standard, because these positions are clearly contradictory?

Is the president being moral when he allows mostly Muslim refugees from Syria into the country but permits few Syrian Christians to enter? Doesn’t it make sense he would protect Christians first because they are the ones targeted by Islamic fundamentalists for death, forced marriages, and sexual slavery?

Mark Twain is quoted as saying: “Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other.” That’s funny, but Twain didn’t tell us what he thought was right or why. Perhaps he would fit right in today.

What is the new standard for “right” and “moral”? Who established it and why should anyone follow your standard when mine might be the antithesis of yours?

The inability or unwillingness to answer these questions and to enforce a moral code that mostly served humanity well until the self-indulgent 1960s began to erode its foundations is responsible for the confusion and moral chaos that is all around us.

Who will rescue us from this moral quagmire? It certainly won’t be anyone running for president. These things bubble up from the human heart; they do not trickle down from Washington.

© 2016 Tribune Content Agency LLC.

Listen to Cal Thomas’ commentary on The World and Everything in It.