Replies

So you argue that individuals must oppose what is contrary to nature and to God’s laws... Agreed. But then you go on to “construct a wall of separation” between the private individual and the public domain ... That is contradictory and denies the duty we owe not only individually but also collectively to society. The moral imperative to uphold what is good and oppose what is evil.

You cannot separate morality from the public sphere... and especially from politics. For when you do such, you do injury to reason and insult God... He who created both the individual, the Church, and the state. While all may have their appropriate powers and spheres of primary influence, nevertheless they are co-joined in their end purpose, which is to uphold good and restrain evil.

If you argue that a political party must not voice opposition to a moral evil, even though the individuals that make up that party must, by divine design, oppose such evil, then you might as well argue that the body and soul are not intimately joined. Where goes the individual, goes the family, goes the culture, goes the nation. All are interconnected, and the social bonds cannot be severed without giving rise to moral ambiguity and anarchy.

Societies rise and collapse not only through the action and inaction of the individual, but also, and by natural extension, through the fiat of the collective group.

Just as the moral imperative of self defense extends from the individual to the family to the nation, so then does the moral imperative of cultural defense against a known evil.

“Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.” -—Robert A. Heinlein

Just as the moral imperative of self defense extends from the individual to the family to the nation, so then does the moral imperative of cultural defense against a known evil.

The Roman Empire tolerated and encouraged all sorts of deviant behavior, while the Germans, according to Tacitus, bound sodomites hand and foot and threw them in a bog.

Now let's see, was it the Romans who invaded and overthrew the Germans, or was it the other way around? Do you really reap what you sow?