I find myself in a meta-moral dilemma I think many others are in. On the one hand I am deeply troubled by both President Obama’s use of drone warfare (as I have said before) and now his justification for killing American citizens he deems a potential threat to national security without due process. I find these two policies to be morally repugnant, not to mention potentially dangerous to our standing in the world and our personal liberties. For our government to conduct them in our name makes me sad and angry. If this is the kind of country we have become out of fear, then the terrorists have managed to damage our moral character as a nation, a victory we should not have allowed them to win.
All governments justify immoral actions in the name of national security. What, then, makes us different? As far as I can see, nothing. So when the government of Syria kills its own people, when rebels in Somalia or the Sudan kill indiscriminately, by what moral standard or authority do we raise objections? The answer is none. The use of torture, and now these policies, have stripped away from our nation any claim to taking the moral high ground in international relations and conflict. These actions by our political leaders have diminished us a people, made worse by the fact that we are a democracy. They do what they do, and we elect them again anyway. George Bush served two terms as president. Barack Obama will as well. I think the actions of our government for the last twelve years represent the real moral decline of our nation.
At the other end of my moral dilemma, however, is the fact that while I find President Obama’s war policies morally repugnant, I feel the same way about the kind of criticism he has had to endure since taking office, especially from people who claim to be Christian. These people – religious and political – have shown themselves to be dishonest, racist, and mean spirited in their attacks on him. And make no mistake, their attacks have been and are directed at him, not his policies. From the day Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) yelled “you lie” during President Obama’s 2010 State of the Union address, he has experienced a level of personal disrespect unparalleled in modern American history. These attacks have been so relentless and outrageous as to fit the category of “shameless.”
This level of disrespect he has endured sickens me to the point where I am tempted to push aside my moral outrage at his war policies. These people simply hate President Obama as a person. So when I criticize his policies I feel like I am unintentionally lending support to a group of people for whom I have nothing but contempt. I don’t believe they give a damn about this country. But I do, and I believe President Obama does, so how can I stand up for what I believe in without throwing weight behind people whose words and actions represent the worst about this country.
That is the moral quandary all of us face who support many of his other policies, but cannot ignore the ones we find so morally unacceptable. I understand that no one does everything you like, but the moral outrage these specific policies stir up cannot be ignored either. At the same time. the personal attacks to which the President has been subjected are scandalous. So does criticizing the former represent de facto support for the latter? What does a citizen do in a situation like this?
I invite you to give your answer.
