March 19, 2006
My mother’s sense of justice, of ethics and morality had a great effect on me. I am sure that your parents influence your own ideas in these areas also. I am never sure why Mother affected me so much more than my siblings. For, I must tell you, the other four children of my parents have not lived their lives as outspoken liberals, either religiously or politically. My thesis is that because I was the oldest, I got a concentrated dose of mother’s teachings about right and wrong.
At a time when we lived in segregated Southern Illinois I can remember hearing her hold forth to some friends about how segregated schools were “just wrong.” She attempted to live out the social gospel theory preached in our Methodist Churches. “It’s deeds, not creeds, that determine whether one is a good Christian,” was her understanding. She really tried to be fair, despite the incident I shared with the children this morning.
One of the ethical and moral questions of that time was the issue of unions in the coal mines. John L. Lewis was president of the United Mineworkers. However, there was a competing union, one less antagonistic to the owners. Our neighbors, the Wagners belonged to that union. Union struggles were often rough, no holds barred. Mr. Wagner had two sons who followed him into the mines. One was killed and another injured in what appeared to be a planned explosion. My parents both supported unions and recognized that they had done a great deal of good for workers. However, they were very fond of their neighbors. There was a great deal of quiet conversation between them as they tried to come to terms with conflicting moral and ethical standards. I do not know what their final answer was. I do know that my mother’s response to the death of Mr. Wagner’s son, the machinations of John L. Lewis, and the reluctance of mine owners to pay a decent wage was, “It’s Just Wrong!”
Although my mother labeled many things just wrong, we children soon learned that the worst thing we could do, in her eyes, was to lie. Honesty was her highest value. My brothers still compare notes on incidents from our childhood. They all agree that if you were going to lie to my mother, you better be darn good at it, cover all your bases, and hope she never, EVER, found you out. I early decided that I could never attain that level of skill, and that it was just better to tell the truth. Since one of the signals that I was embarrassed was that my ears turned red, and since lying embarrassed me, I knew she would eventually find me out. It was foolish to try; therefore I would take my chances with the truth.
In turn, my children learned the same lesson. I adopted my mother’s highest value—honesty. My children learned that the punishment would be far less for confession to a misdemeanor, rather than attempting to lie about it. Lying got you longer time in detention, more scolding, and greater disapproval. Honesty IS the best policy.
So, what are we to think of the story of Abram and Sarai? Abram was chosen of God, was to be the founder of great nations, and Sarai the chosen mother.
What kind of lesson do we learn from this episode of deception? What kind of ethics does the founder of the three great Abrahamic religions display? Pretty questionable, in my opinion.
This illustration of Abram’s duplicity is even repeated in a slightly different version later in Genesis. The story was evidently well known among the Israelites. Classical theology tells us that God so loved Abram that he protected Sarai, (by inflicting plagues upon Pharaoh) whenever he even thought about approaching her. Thus, Pharaoh sent the family on their way, but not before Abram had acquired more flocks and slaves to add to his wealth. God’s grace was upon Abram.
This is one of those Bible stories that really disturb me. I don’t remember any of my Sunday School teachers sharing it with us during classes. I think I first ran across it when I was an adolescent and decided to read the Bible for myself. I thought it strange then. Basically the father of us all was dishonest. We can argue that he was in fear of his life, but if so, why did he accept profit from his duplicity? No, Abram lied, and lying is wrong.
By the time I read the story and made that judgement, honesty was already the basis of my moral and ethical system—although I probably would not have put it in those terms at age 14 or so. I probably would have said, “It’s just Wrong!”
Honesty is still the base of my moral and ethical system. Some of you have probably witnessed my indignation at an infraction of that system, which often leads to a stuttering expostulation as I search for the words to express my dismay. Usually the infraction is based on a lack of honesty.
I think that most ethical questions can be traced back to determining what is honest. Let me say that I do not think that it is always easy to be totally honest.
The classic question, from woman to spouse, “Do you think this dress makes me look fat?” calls for a split-second decision on competing values. Does being totally honest outweigh retaining a loving relationship? Good luck with the answer, unless of course the totally honest answer is, “No, I think it makes you look thin, or attractive, or voluptuous.”
It is important to practice honesty in all phases of our lives. Our children will never learn to do so if they do not see it practiced by their parents and other caring adults. If pesky Aunt Alice calls and the teenager who answers the phone is told to relay the message that you are not at home, you have laid the groundwork for other greater lies. It doesn’t take long for kids to figure out that dad is lying to mom or vice versa. When they do, they will follow the example they witnessed.
A healthy relationship between partners cannot be maintained if it is based on dishonesty. My response to the dress question is this: “Women—do not EVER ask that question of someone you love if you have the slightest doubt as to the answer.” Don’t put a loved one in that difficult position. And men, do not EVER ask, “Do you think I could take our 25 year old son in one-on-one basketball?” Maintaining and nurturing a loving relationship also has a high value. Don’t put your partners in the position of having to choose between competing moral values.
I also believe we must carry our ethical values into our lives at the places we work. If we are honest, we will be on time, work diligently while we are there, and refrain from furnishing school supplies for our children from the ample stock at work. And, we should expect the same honesty from our employers. If the contract at the beginning of your work life said that you would receive a pension, honesty demands that the employer fulfill that contract. If the employer guaranteed a cost of living increase in pay, assuming your good and efficient work, they should pay that increase. It is dishonest, unethical and immoral to cheat employees—again assuming that they have performed their duties satisfactorily.
I believe it is also necessary to carry our ethical values into our social lives. It is unethical to present ourselves as something we are not. It is unethical to lie about our income, our background, our educational level, our ex-partners, or our marital status. Now, these are pretty simple examples. Let’s get more complex. … Living above one’s means is a form of dishonesty. … Failing to challenge expressions of racism, homophobia or sexism, is a form of lying—assuming you recognize such statements. This is because people assume that you share such sentiments, unless you tell them otherwise.
Now for the caveat. The curse of liberal religion is that there are very few absolutes. And even they have caveats. If being totally honest is dangerous, you are forgiven for lying. For example, there may be times and places when it would be dangerous for a gay or lesbian person to be totally honest. He may not be able to hold down a job in his field if it is known that he is gay. She may be in physical danger of being attacked if she is known to be lesbian.
Perhaps this is the answer to Abram’s story. If Sarai was so attractive that he believed an Egyptian who hoped to please Pharaoh would kill him, perhaps he was justified in lying. However, he still profited by placing Sarai in a very tenuous position. Could Sarai have turned down his request? Could she have refused to play the part of sister, instead of wife? In the context of ancient tribal societies, I doubt it.
Let us move the discussion into the present. Instead of Abram and Sarai, let us consider the Fastow family, Andrew and Lea, of Enron infamy. Andrew is the former Chief Financial Officer of Enron. Although his misdeeds are extremely complex, it appears that he set up separate corporations that bought and sold Enron properties to enhance the profit margin of the parent corporation.
In the process he made millions. And, because Lea was listed as part owner of one of them, she profited also. When the Enron bubble burst, she was caught in the fall-out. She was tried and sentenced to prison, and has now finished her term, even as her husband testifies against his former bosses.
There is a lot of unethical behavior in the Enron debacle. However, I am most interested in the Fastow family. It seems Andrew’s greed was insatiable. Was Lea guilty of the same sin? Did she only agree because her spouse pressured her to do so? In the context of today’s society, I think we would say that she could have said no. She could have refused to live a lie. Just as we can not unravel completely the back-story of Abram and Sarai, we can not do so with Andrew and Lea. What did they say to each other in the privacy of their home? Was Lea an enthusiastic co-conspirator, or did she attempt to dissuade her greedy husband? We may never know.
The ethics we learn and practice at home are also played out in the public arena. The questionable ethics of business and political figures have caused a great deal of turmoil in those overlapping fields recently. It is difficult to find a good word printed about lobbyists after we heard in great detail about Jack Abramoff’s escapades.
Abramoff, he of the black raincoat and oversized fedora, is another example of greed run rampant. And his lobbying empire was based on dishonesty. He represented certain Indian tribes when they tried to get licenses for casinos. Then he lobbied against other casinos to prevent their obtaining a license, and drew in James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family to bring his Christian voice to bear. Dobson says they just happened to be on the same side on that particular issue. Money changed hands—lots of money. Sometimes it went to Abramoff directly. Sometimes he donated to campaign funds, and sometimes to a congressperson’s favorite charity. Sometimes he furnished very expensive meals at his Washington restaurant. And sometimes he paid for expensive trips to Scotland or the Caribbean.
Abramoff is a symbol of dishonesty. He is a symbol of the intersection between politics and business where things get messy. Although business people have a right to present their ideas and views to congresspeople, and lobbyists are the vehicles for them to do so, buying their vote is forbidden. There is so much money sloshing around in the system, there are many opportunities to influence votes either directly or indirectly. Currently the Ethics Committee is crafting legislation to address this issue.
Following the unraveling of Jack Abramoff’s lobbying empire, there were many statements from politicians that things would be different. They would craft legislation that would drastically change things in Washington.
They would eliminate some of the loopholes that allowed Abramoff to operate so blatantly. Unfortunately as the legislation proceeds through the process, it is becoming watered down. If we want to influence the process, if we want to contribute to a fairer, more honest system of government, we might want to contact our legislators and demand they clean up the system.
James Luther Adams shared how his social conscience was shaped. He came to the conclusion that voluntary associations were key to demanding ethical and moral actions from governments. Voluntary associations are all those organizations to which you choose to belong. This church is a voluntary association. So is Rotary. So is a political party. So is a glee club, and WOW and Meat n’P’tatas. Community Concerts is a voluntary association, as is One Muskegon. Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and 4-H Clubs are voluntary associations.
This nation has been noted for its many voluntary associations since its founding. They provide an opportunity for people to gather in special interest groups. They may be focused on wildly differing interests. There are so many they are difficult for a government or other institution to control. They give us an opportunity for unfettered speech, an opportunity to influence our neighbors and friends.
Adams learned from his visits to Germany that the anti-fascist groups he met with agreed that they should have organized much earlier. They thought that they could have derailed the immoral, unethical Nazis if they had done so. They should have taken advantage of their voluntary associations to organize, before it became too dangerous to do so.
Please do not hear this example as saying that I think we are heading into a fascist state. There are those who make that argument, but I am not here doing so. It is, however, an example of what can happen if we ignore disturbing behavior. The behavior I am addressing is unethical behavior, and I do not believe we should ignore it.
I believe that we must encourage those people in public life who attempt to live ethical and moral lives. I believe we must encourage those who attempt to set up behavioral guidelines that encourage ethical actions. I also believe we must challenge those people who refuse to promote ethical behavior in public life. Although we can do this individually, we gain strength through actions with others.
If you want to influence the behavior of your elected officials, join with other members of the voluntary associations to which you belong to pressure them to behave ethically. The bottom line for elected officials is, of course, the possibility that they can be voted out of office. An individual who points this out is only one, but a group that voices such a possibility is another proposition.
It all begins with each one of us, however. Unless we behave ethically at home and among our friends, we have no moral authority to demand it of others. Unless we behave honestly our children will learn dishonest ways to interact with the world. Unless we speak truth, our lives will be based on shifting sands, rather than firm foundations.
To build a better, more truthful, honest and ethical world, we must begin the only place we can—with ourselves. Then we can join with other speakers of truths to demand it of our friends, our business leaders, and our public officials.
Honesty IS the best policy. For, if you lie, It’s Just Wrong!
Shalom and Saalat.
Blessed Be and Amen.