By David Hegg
At the ground level of ethics is the understanding that living ethically is honorable while unethical behavior is shameful. This fundamental recognition of shame and honor can be found in every society. Even the concept of guilt and innocence is tied to what a society considers right or wrong, honorable or shameful. When you transgress a societal law or moral standard, the unavoidable consequence is supposed to be personal shame. And when a society reaches the place where egregious action fails to produce shame, it is time to consider the reality that its ethical standards have been incrementally, but substantially, eroded.
It is fair to say that in too many cases, public reaction to the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk has allowed ridicule and hatred to rise to an unprecedented level. As I have read the remarks of highly placed politicos, famous athletes and film stars, and a host of others who sprinted to let the world know just how gleeful they were that one they considered vicious had met a violent end, I felt great despair for our homeland. How did we fall this far into all that can be wrong in a society?
The question is: Should there be shame? Or is caustic, hate-filled rancor, name-calling, and joy over a criminally expedited death acceptable and even applauded? You can’t have it both ways. And yet, we are immersed in a culture where those allied with the purveyors of caustic declarations refuse to be good parents and shout, “You should be ashamed of yourselves!”
It is no coincidence that the seeming death of shame parallels the erosion of belief in God in America. After all, God is the King of shame, given that he has determined what is right and wrong, and defined what is wrong as sin. And it is no surprise that shameful behavior rises as faith in God wanes for one simple reason. People too often worship what they want to do and choose a god that allows it. Today, too many are worshiping at the trough of unrestricted personal pleasure while angrily mocking any person or worldview that dares to curb their appetite.
Now, before you go off ranting about my puritanical views, consider this: My point is actually more than the surface evidence that the acceptance of unkind, rancorous speech has eroded our ethical norms. My point is much more important than the differences those in our free society have toward public expression.
My point is that, with the erosion of shame in this area, we have lost an essential guardrail on the treacherous highway of life. Those who call evil good without any sense of personal shame do so because they understand that the train of a debauched society is heading toward even more aggressive expressions, and they can hardly wait. We are watching the rise of a new type of citizenry that defines freedom as life without boundaries, restraints, and shame.
Unfortunately for us all, in a society where shame no longer exerts a restraining force, freedom devolves into chaos. Some reading this will think I should be ashamed of my conservative views, as though my conservatism somehow curtails their freedom. But I actually answer to the greater ideal of a society where some things are sacred, and need to be protected from the base passions of those who refuse to accept the basic foundations of civility.
We have laws that prohibit the theft of personal property. We must resurrect a sense of shame that condemns those attempting to rob us of the moral and ethical standards that should allow us all, even in the midst of monumental disagreement, to live as an honorable society. And for those who disagree, who applaud demeaning rhetoric emanating from their own side of the aisle … shame on you!