"Something happened a long time ago in Haiti and people might not want to talk about. They were under the heel of the French, you know Napoleon the third and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said 'We will serve you if you will get us free from the prince.' True story. And so the devil said, 'Ok it's a deal.' And they kicked the French out. The Haitians revolted and got something themselves free. But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another."
The opinion of a man who explains earthquakes not with geology, but theology, specifically made up theology, is not one which carries much sway. That's why the following statement about marijuana is so problematic.
“It’s completely out of control,” Mr. Robertson said. “Prisons are being overcrowded with juvenile offenders having to do with drugs. And the penalties, the maximums, some of them could get 10 years for possession of a joint of marijuana. It makes no sense at all.”
Like me and all sensible pragmatists, Robertson has just assessed the cost-benefit of the war on drugs and found it did not pass the test. And as all sensible pragmatists would also advise, never sign a deal with the devil. That rarely works out.
Robertson even employs a facile comparison, “If people can go into a liquor store and buy a bottle of alcohol and drink it at home legally, then why do we say that the use of this other substance is somehow criminal?” This kind of reasoning is great for moral consistency, since it discourages treating one behavior as different from an identical behavior. Marijuana and alcohol are both recreational drugs the Bible does not forbid. Jesus even turned water into wine, “I don’t think he was a teetotaler. The key is moderation, Robertson believes, “When I was in college, I hit [da booze] pretty hard, but that was before Christ."
This kind of reasoning also is terrible for moral consistency, because it provides us no means to reject behaviors which are similar, in this case heroin, cocaine, and ecstasy. Those are also recreational drugs. If we use them in moderation, why should they be illegal? Along the same lines, why shouldn't homosexuals be able to marry? We let heterosexuals marry. Jesus was for love, he wasn't about keeping people apart. “If you follow the teaching of Christ, you know that Christ is a compassionate man,” Robertson said. Either these things should be legal, or alcohol-marijuana is a false moral equivalency.
This mixing and matching between pragmatism, false equivalency, and his typical black-and-white moral condemnation raises the question, is it satire? Is Robertson simply lending his imprimatur to a liberal issue in order to scare moderates like me away? I'd almost prefer to live in a world where one percent of the population is in jail for drug offenses than one where I agree with Pat Robertson. As a career pariah, he must know his opinion negatively correlates with everyone outside his insular base. Perhaps Pat Robertson's metawareness has finally reached the point in his later years that he's willing to wield his brand as a weapon. Either that, or, Pat Robertson actually thinks marijuana use should be legal.
No comments:
Post a Comment