Morality is largely a matter of geographic

by David Grand
November 11, 2004

You can relax. I'm not going to do a post mortem on the election at this late date. For anything I could say would be superfluous. However, I do feel compelled to say a few hundred words about the dominant role moral values played in the election, rightly or wrongly.

In viewing an overlay of the national breakdown of electoral votes shown in blue for Kerry and red for Bush, my first reaction was one of disbelieve, resembling as it did a solid, red quilt with only one blue border and patches of blue in the upper middle border and adjoining corner. If it was a quilt, that odd mixture of colors would make it unlikely that someone would buy it at a flea market unless some Republican wanted it as a keepsake.

How was it I wondered, then, that the number of red states so outnumbered the blue ones when the difference between winning and losing was just 32 electoral votes? But I didn't have to wonder for long. For the answer was as obvious as a forty foot poster: It was Bush's perceived moral values among the 80 million evangelicals, who along with the 48 percent of Americans who never miss sitting in a pew on Sundays, that carried the day for him in large measure. That's in sharp contrast to the 40 percent of Democrats who only go to church every so often. Much to the unhappiness of those in the pulpit and those counting the money in the collection plates.

I must say, I didn't realize till now that there was such a religious and moral divide in the country. For I'd always thought we were one, not two, nations under God, with all of us sharing the same hopes for ourselves and children, including moral values. But apparently I was as wrong as Dick Cheney was is saying our troops would be welcomed in Baghdad with "garlands of flowers."  

And as best as I can understand what meant by moral values in the minds of those who regard them so highly, it boils down to opposing abortion, same sex marriages, gun control, stem cell research and against appointing other than conservative judges to the bench, especially as pertains to filling any vacant seats on the Supreme Court seats in the near future.

Now, it's been my belief that too many moralists begin with a dislike of reality; that those who are forever moralizing are usually hypocrites; that what is moral is what you feel good after and what is immoral is what you feel bad after; and that, as Oscar Wilde said, "Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people we personally dislike."

I think old Oscar (gay as he was) deserves an Oscar for his enlightened view. Since there's no question that geography had a lot to do with Bush winning the popular vote by such a wide margin throughout the South, most of middle American and Western states. For the vast majority of people living there, particularly the so-called religious right, regard California (most notably the San Francisco area) as a modern-day Sodom and Gomorrah; and New York City as home to liberal-elitists, and which like other northern metropolitan areas is awash in narcotics and crime. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there some parable in the Bible about he who is without sin throwing the first stone? 

But that's all history now. For like it or not, he's our President for the next four years. And in wartime, he deserves the support of all Americans, no matter how faulty his management of the war has been. In short, let's call a truce and put an end to the bickering about the election and turn our attention to the pressing domestic problems that were overshadowed by extraneous debates over moral values, as well as refocusing on the ever present threat of terrorists on our doorstep. We not only should; we must.