At TalkLeft, TChris provides a textbook case of all that’s wrong with the far left’s moral relativism in this post about Saudi Arabia’s new death penalty crime – showing Turkish soap operas during Ramadan.
[Saudi Arabia’s Supreme Judicial Council, Sheikh Saleh al-] Lohaidan advised the station owners that “those who promote corruption in belief and actions … can be put to death through the judicial process.” Like death penalty advocates in the United States, Lohaidan subscribes to a deterrent theory: if lesser penalties don’t get the attention of offenders, death surely will.
Note Chris’ ham-handed use of liberals’ favorite tactic, the moral equivalency tar brush. In this misguided view, the death penalty for murderers in the U.S. is equivalent to handing it out in Saudi over a television show.
Chris goes on to humorously mock the Saudis’ provincial narrow mindedness and justifiably so. But readers are expected to follow along and paint the U.S.’s use of the death penalty with the same brush.
It’s nothing more than Ideological Slander 101. There is no equivalency whatever between the two. Chris undoubtedly knows this, although judging from the early comments many of his readers lack the capacity to understand the difference.
Murder is one of the most heinous crimes a person can commit. It ends the existence of another human being, often brutally and painfully and always without the victim’s consent. Saudi TV producers’ sole crime, should any be bold enough to challenge the law, would be providing a service desired by Saudi citizens. Where is the correlation? It’s MIA, my friends.
The fundamental problem is that the left is uncomfortable with making value judgments based on absolute moral standards. It’s all relative according to the left’s dogmatic script, even when it’s not. One need look no farther than liberals’ undying support for abortion of the innocent to see an illustration of the childishly inconsistent thinking that defines their ideology.