Ado Annie Carnes summed it up best when she sang her song, "I caint say no" in the American musical "Oklahoma." 

 

Literally, "It aint so much a question of not knowin' what to do. I've known right from wrong since I was ten."

 

For Americans of a certain age who grew up with a set of values and morals that admission rang true. But for those born decades after the Rogers and Hammerstein Broadway hit, that song lyric might as well be a relic of olden tymes quoted by old fuddie duddies like me who cling to their Bibles and principles.

 

I remember how insulted I felt in 2008 when candidate Barack Obama said: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

 

At the time, Obama was courting Pennsylvania voters, but I remember clearly how insulted I felt that somehow my Christian morality was being conflated with something as unrelated as trade policy. 

 

Upon later reflection, I was more incensed.

 

Obama attempted to characterize my people's moral opinions and lifestyle as being monolithic and outdated. He lumped them all together as if they were some leftovers, simmering in a old stewpot that had been on the back burner for far too long.

 

He and millions of especially younger people felt that it was time for a new cook and a new morality to redo the menu.

 

Obama did me a favor with his temporary moment of honesty, however. He made me realize that America had turned not only a political and philosophical corner, but he confirmed my suspicion that my generation was getting the bum's rush by a group of people who didn't share my world view. All they needed was just a little nudge to adopt a new selective morality that could change on an as-needed basis. 

 

So, America chose Obama and with him came a new moral challenge, one in which the country would face some difficult ethical choices where our principles and values would be tested.

 

I do not wish to place all the blame for America's moral decay on Mr. Obama; suffice it to say that he ushered in what I would call a kind of moral schizophrenia.

 

Since his time in office, this pervasive mentality has manifested itself in a deep inconsistency or fragmentation in America's moral thinking or behavior. Vast numbers of people in my country now hold conflicting moral beliefs and are ready to act on them. We have seen these play out in our race relations, in workplaces, in the military, in our schools and in our government's bureaucracy.

 

The list of cultural imperatives that the Left has told us we must observe is long and these are not merely requests in polite conversation or suggestions; they were introduced as non-negotiable norms – regulations -- by the last administration.

 

Some like DEI and CRT and those supporting violations of Title IX are, thankfully, being reversed by the current administration, but there is one big nagging question that must be answered.

 

Have these ideas taken root among ordinary Americans to the point that there is no going back to the old status quo?   

 

Have we turned onto a one-way street, politically, where no one is willing to address questions of basic fairness or morality or even consider what we left behind and its value to our very survival as a principled people? Are we doomed to live in a society that is guided by moral relativists who regard having a moral double standard as acceptable and make no apology for holding contradictory moral positions and applying them unevenly? Is hypocrisy now the coin of the cultural realm, and does it share a purse with "situational ethics" where moral choices are based on convenience or circumstance rather than principle?

 

A real example is how millions of Americans and many foreigners view the U.S. president, Donald Trump, and his actions … and successes.

 

Many people will not tell you, openly, that they tend to separate people into two groups: those they deem likable and those they find reprehensible.

 

The likable ones are given the benefit of the doubt and the reprehensible ones are seldom given credit for anything good they might do.

 

Should Donald Trump or his actions be judged or condemned because of his human failings alone, without benefit of any context?

 

Christians believe in context and in redemption. They also acknowledge the weaknesses and darker side of human beings, but they also do not condemn the good that humans do.

 

There is a certain fairness that we must accord to each other, and it is not the kind of fairness that ignores the negative things we all do, but it is one that is grounded in the belief that we are not the final arbiters of our life's work.

 

We must engage one another with equal measure of truth and compassion, sincerity and forgiveness.

 

And to be sure, we must punish those among us when absolutely necessary, but we must also be willing to praise those actions that are praiseworthy whether they are for brokering peace deals in the Middle East or finally getting sober after years of addiction.

 

There are no perfect people just as there are no perfect solutions to our problems, but we are wrong to resist forgiving our fellow man, especially when opportunities exist for them to do the right thing.