Ethics in politics
Mar. 10th, 2007 11:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
franceslievensWith the federal elections in June fast approaching various political parties try to convince the electorate of the righteousness of their ideas. The Flemish Christian Democrats present themselves as the only politicians that dare to talk about what matters: ethics. I'm not saying ethics doesn't matter. I'm a trained ethical philosopher after all. Ehics does matter, but not in the way the Christian Democrats try to make us believe.
In an attempt to counter the liberal basic idea of freedom, they stress community and the observation that for most people freedom equals not having to make any choices. What you do with the latter observation tells a lot about your world view. To put it bluntly: Flemish Christian Democrats wish to put the weight of decision making on the shoulders of governing institutions. Other groups believe that it's possible for people to make their own choices and that it is important that you give them the opportunity to make choices according to their own world view.
But those groups can't be heard when the Christian Democrats declare themselves the only party to talk about morals. Their talk about morals unfortunately is the same as everyone's: they uphold the idea that their morals are better than the other's. Hence it is important to make legislation according to these morals and impose them on others. It's a general human trait: thinking you know best, believing your ideas are right. I myself have much trouble not to try and persuade others into my righteousness. It's just that I'm doing right here.
Where the Christian Democrats go wrong, in my eyes, is that the legislation they stand for, is one that will take away a freedom of choice. For instance they wish to reverse the law considering euthanasia, because "most people choose for palliative care anyway". It's not because a tiny group does not opt for that way to end their lives, that they shouldn't be able to make their own choice. They do not harm anyone in choosing for the possiblity to end their life the way they want, and not the way doctors or law decides for them. I even think not more people opt for euthanasia simple because they do not know about it, and the paper work is too much, and no-one really knows what the rules are to follow. And there's the doctors of course, the people that always know best, and sometimes don't want to talk about the wishes of their patients.
In an attempt to counter the liberal basic idea of freedom, they stress community and the observation that for most people freedom equals not having to make any choices. What you do with the latter observation tells a lot about your world view. To put it bluntly: Flemish Christian Democrats wish to put the weight of decision making on the shoulders of governing institutions. Other groups believe that it's possible for people to make their own choices and that it is important that you give them the opportunity to make choices according to their own world view.
But those groups can't be heard when the Christian Democrats declare themselves the only party to talk about morals. Their talk about morals unfortunately is the same as everyone's: they uphold the idea that their morals are better than the other's. Hence it is important to make legislation according to these morals and impose them on others. It's a general human trait: thinking you know best, believing your ideas are right. I myself have much trouble not to try and persuade others into my righteousness. It's just that I'm doing right here.
Where the Christian Democrats go wrong, in my eyes, is that the legislation they stand for, is one that will take away a freedom of choice. For instance they wish to reverse the law considering euthanasia, because "most people choose for palliative care anyway". It's not because a tiny group does not opt for that way to end their lives, that they shouldn't be able to make their own choice. They do not harm anyone in choosing for the possiblity to end their life the way they want, and not the way doctors or law decides for them. I even think not more people opt for euthanasia simple because they do not know about it, and the paper work is too much, and no-one really knows what the rules are to follow. And there's the doctors of course, the people that always know best, and sometimes don't want to talk about the wishes of their patients.
