Posted by
Andrews on Wednesday, April 09, 2008 12:55:47 PM
I was writing a reply to
some comments last night when it struck me that we no longer seem to believe in consequences.
Or, to be more accurate, we believe in consequences, but we just don't want them to be meaningful. Rather than suffering a long penance of any sort, we want a token gesture that shows we are sorry, and then want to move on. And, as we want that for ourselves, we also want it for others. It seems society is no longer willing to impose real punishment on anyone.
Think of Stephen Glass, whose misdeeds have now made him a much desired "expert" on journalistic misdeeds. Oh, he lost his original job, but he landed on his feet. Or Dan Rather. His "fake but accurate" report may have cost him his anchor position, but his face is starting to pop up on my TV again, and with greater frequency. It appears that being a partisan for obvious forgeries doesn't carry as much of a consequence as I thought.
Or, on a much more serious note, those caught fighting against the US in Afghanistan and now detained in Guantanamo. In a past war they would be deemed fortunate if they were not summarily executed as combatants fighting out of uniform. Detention at Gunatanamo is the best they could expect. Instead, we now have people fighting to make sure they have all the legal protection of US citizens.
But that is the pattern of our society. Crime, destructive behaviors, misbehaving children, we want none of them to face any real consequences. Oh, we say we want them to be "punished", but by that we mean some almost meaningless token punishment. We do not want them to really suffer, just to make some gesture then get on with their lives.
You can even hear this in Obama's abortion comments. He doesn't want his daughters "punished with a baby". In short, if they make a mistake, they, like all of society, should have to say "sorry" and then move on.
Even murderers are no exception, as we regularly argue that someone should be let off death row, or released early because they have "reformed" or found Jesus. Which may be a valid argument if prison existed solely to rehabilitate the individual offender. But prison also exists to serve as a deterrent, and if we teach the lesson that you don't have to stay in prison if you say you are different now, the deterrent effect of prison is lost, as we can see in the rampant crime of today.
And that, in a nutshell is the problem with eliminating consequences. Even if we accept that a compassionate society should give people a second chance, doing so will likely do more harm than good.
People refrain form doing wrong for two reasons. Either they are not inclined to commit that particular offense or they fear the consequences. Sometimes the explicit consequences (jail, financial loss, whatever) need not be very heavy, as the social stigma attached is great enough to provide its own discouragement. But we live in an age where there is no stigma attached to anything*, so punishment is the only thing which can keep people form doing wrong.
Once we make the consequences of anything mere gestures, we essentially give that action our approval, with the results we see around us every day.
--------------------------------------------------------------
* There is still stigma, but it rarely attaches to things we wish to discourage. More often than not the stigma attached to non-PC speech or choosing to be a stay at home mother is stronger than the stigma attached to actual crimes such as murder. Is it any wonder society is in such bad shape when many feel more distaste for those espousing creationism than for those robbing banks? (For the record, I am not a creationist, but I find it absurd to view the beliefs of any group with more disdain than one feels for actual criminals.)
ADDENDUM (to footnote)
Let me clarify, when I say "I am not a creationist" I mean I am not a young earth, ex nihilo creationist. I believe in a G-d who worked through the natural laws he created. As far as the account in the Torah is concerned, He was speaking to former slaves and shepherds who probably would find astrophysics a bit daunting, so He told them a story about creation in 6 days, as G-d, like any good speaker, tailors His story to His audience. (For those who think this means G-d lied, I ask this: If a child asks "Where do babies come from?" Do you go into a full description of genetics, cellular reproduction, and the stages of gestation, as well as the mechanics of intercourse? And if you do not, do you consider that a "lie"?)