Moral beliefs don’t

imply authoritarianism
In “Keep absolute statements to yourself” (ODE, Feb. 21), Scott Austin claims “democracy (is) inherently evil,” but then goes on to question the very existence of “absolute right and wrong.” If I’m not mistaken, his earlier use of the word “evil” denotes the very existence of such. Either Austin must accept that absolute morality exists, but should not be coerced upon a citizenry by the government, or else that there is no such thing as right, wrong or any ethical litmus test for a given action.
As his claims stand, I feel inclined to turn his own words against him: “Beware the dangers of such a stance, sir, for it would readily place you in the same court and arena as the Christian right, a place I am confident you would not like to find yourself.”
Yet the fallacy of Austin’s argument lies in the assumption that those who believe in absolute morality also believe in government policies that force it upon other people. As a Christian, I freely concede the existence of absolute right and absolute wrong. However, as a fallible human, I have no authority to impose my guesses as to what absolute morals are upon other people: This is why I am a card-carrying libertarian.
My being a libertarian and Christian immediately defeats Austin’s logic. Through the absolute moral of “Do not coerce others unless in defense” do I justify my politics. How, Austin, do you justify yours?

Brandon Rhodes

freshman

political science