... RWAs [right wing authoritarians] are angry with us because they've been told to mistake our tolerance and flexibility for moral unseriousness.
- From Orcinus, a liberal blog
This is really the key to a lot of things, including the perception of polyamory. What a lot of people see in polyamory (even many of those who take a 'hey, if it works for them, I guess that's okay' stance) is permissiveness. Too often, the argument that "people should be free to do these things" is not seen as a choice borne out of ethical behavior, but rather a laxity of moral character - "yeah sure that's okay - it's not a big deal." The same with non-traditional families, gay marriage, etc.
The point is that polyamory needs to be described as a choice that is rooted in ethical consideration. By and large, poly people are poly not because they can 'get away with it.' They are poly because they feel that this is the best choice - because they feel it's the right thing to do. That's the key. For poly people, being poly is, in their life, not a loophole, but a moral imperative. This imperative tells us that things like love, family, intimacy, connection, shared joy and shared resposnibility, these are the moral high ground, even when their form falls outside of societal norms and common definitions. I refer to the phrase "God is love" a lot - I find it an incredibly concise description of what I believe. And thus, I do not deny God when he comes knocking at my door - even if he is dressed funny.
This goes for larger liberal/progressive ideals - tolerance, flexibility, relativism are not ethical shortcuts. They are definitive moral stances. I think that even liberals forget that sometimes.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
thoughts from the VaxJedi
Often, he says things I was thinking, much better than I ever could: