Shouldn’t
the first question be “is it honest?” Parsing how it will cause this, or force
that, or mock or not mock to me are all secondary considerations. If someone
makes a promise (a covenant) to a friend, a spouse, or their God how is that
now even considered as a positive to break that promise? How is it ever a right
thing to do? If I place myself under an honestly made promise, no amount of
inducement would persuade me to break that covenant. Since the filming was done
dishonestly, what twist of rationalization makes that okay? Even an atheist
journalist knows he can’t reveal something told to him “off the record”, just
to site a simple example of ethics. Are not Christians claiming a higher
standard than a journalist? Since a people who believe in the sacredness of
that ceremony ask it not to be filmed, what kind of mind decides that they can
ignore their request? Did the leaker not promise to obey that request? Yet they
ignore their promise. Not only ignore it like the film magically fell off the
back of a turnip truck, but actually use subterfuge, deceit and lies to cause
it to happen
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment